CYIL Vol. 4, 2013

THE PROTOCOL OF 1997 TO AMEND THE VIENNA CONVENTION ON NUCLEAR LIABILITY… signed the Protocol of 2004 to Amend the Paris Convention of 1960 (hereinafter also “the Protocol of 2004”). 17 Both Protocols ( the Protocol of 1997 and the Protocol of 2004 ) represent a considerable shift in the regime of nuclear third party liability. In particular, they lay down increased liability limits, prolong the period for claiming nuclear damages and enlarge the scope of compensated damages. 18 All these three international conventions ( the Joint Protocol, the Protocol of 1997 and the Protocol of 2004) also govern issues of jurisdiction. Consequently, they clearly fall under the exclusive competence of the European Union in this area. 19 However, neither of these conventions allow accession of the European Union, as only “States” may become their Contracting Parties. Consequently, the Member States may accede, or ratify these conventions only on being authorised to do so by the European Union. 20 In the course of the negotiations leading to the adoption of the Protocol of 2004, the representatives of the European Union pointed out the fact that such adoption is to be authorised by the Union. Further, the Union’s representatives pointed out that the ratification or accession to the Protocol is as much the responsibility of Member States as that of the European Union. On one hand, the Union possessed an exclusive competence regarding the amendment of Article 13 of the Paris Convention in as far as it is concerned with the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (hereinafter: “ the Brussels Regulation ”). On the other hand, the Member States retain their jurisdiction on matters covered by the Protocol which are not included in Community law. Consequently, three decisions were issued with respect to this step: 1) Council Decision of 27 November 2003, authorising Member States that are Contracting Parties to the Paris Convention of 29 July 1960 on Third Party 17 The Protocol to Amend the Paris Convention on Third Party Liability in the Field of Nuclear Energy of 12 February 2004 has not yet entered into force. 18 Currently, there is abundant scientific literature dealing with the content of the “second generation” conventions. For a general overview see: Pelzer, N . Main Features of the Revised International Regime Governing Nuclear Liability – Progress and Standstill’, in OECD (ed.) International Nuclear Law: History, Evolution and Outlook, OECD, Paris, 2010, pp. 355 et seq. This contribution also contains a number of references to existing papers on this topic. 19 Magnus, U . Jurisdiction and enforcement of judgements under the current nuclear liability regimes within the EU member states, in Pelzer, N . (ed.) Europäisches Atomhaftungsrecht im Umbruc h, Nomos Verlag, Baden Baden, 2010, pp. 105 et seq. 20 The European Union is in a very simile position, when dealinge.g. with the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage of 2001 and with the International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea. 3. Authorisations issued vis-à-vis the “Paris” Member States 3.1 Decision making with regard to the Protocol of 2004