CYIL Vol. 4, 2013

THE PROTOCOL OF 1997 TO AMEND THE VIENNA CONVENTION ON NUCLEAR LIABILITY… do contain requirement of simultaneous deposit of the ratification instruments by all Member States. 3.2.1 Relation between the Amended Paris Convention and the Brussels Regulation The main implication of the existing decision making with regard to the ratification of the Protocol of 2004 concerns the relation between the Amended Paris Convention and the Brussels Regulation. Basically, Article 71 (1) of the Brussels Regulation contains an exclusion clause which grants priority to the special conventions. 25 Pursuant to this provision, the Brussels Regulation “shall not affect any conventions to which the member states are parties and which in relation to particular matters, govern jurisdiction or recognition or enforcement of judgments”. The purpose of the exception is to ensure compliance with the rules of jurisdiction laid down in such specialised conventions, “ since when those rules were enacted, account was taken of the specific features of the matters to which they relate” . 26 Since the very earliest beginnings of the efforts to harmonise the rules on international jurisdiction and enforcement on the European level, the international nuclear liability treaties have been considered as legal instruments of a special nature, having priority anchoring the principle of jurisdictional unity, are such types of conventions. 27 However, Article 71 of the Brussels Regulation does not contain any guarantee to any further international convention. 28 It is arguable that the revision of a convention justifies its classification as a “ new ” convention, not falling under Article 71 of the Regulation. More clearly, this is confirmed by the Decision of 8 March 2004. Point 8 of this Decision provides: “Three of the Member States, namely Austria, Ireland and Luxembourg, are not Parties to the Paris Convention. Given that the Protocol amends the Paris Convention, that Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 authorises Member States bound by that Convention to continue to apply the rules on jurisdiction provided for in it and that the Protocol does not substantially amend the rules on jurisdiction of the Convention, it is objectively justified that this Decision should be addressed only to those Member States that are Parties to the Paris Convention. 25 For further details see Sands, P., Gallizzi, P . The 1968 Brussels Convention and liability for nuclear damage, Nuclear Law Bulletin, No. 64, 1999, pp. 18 et seq . Here, the authors deal with the mutual relationship between the Brussels Convention of 1968, which used to be predecessor of the current Brussels Regulation and the Paris Convention. 26 See ECJ [1994] ECR I – 5439 (C-406/92 Tatry v. Maciej Rataj ) ECR [1994], at paragraph 46. 27 For further details see Vanden Borre, T., Bonotto, O . Problèmes de compétence judiciaire dans les procédures de droit pénal relatives aux accidents nucléaires. Les principes du droit pénal et l’article 13 de la Convention de Paris, in AIDN/INLA (ed.) Nuclear Inter Jura 1997, Société de Législation Comparée, Paris, 1998, pp. 467 et seq . 28 See Kennett, W. The Brussels I Regulation, International and Comparative Law Quarterly , Vol. 50, 2001, at p. 736 .