CYIL Vol. 4, 2013

JAKUB HANDRLICA CYIL 4 ȍ2013Ȏ for simultaneous ratification creates a de facto barrier for further development of the international nuclear liability law. 4. Authorisations vis-à-vis the “Vienna” Member States 4.1 “Eastern Enlargements” of the European Union and nuclear liability conventions Prior to 2004, the map of the European Union seemed to be basically identical to the map of the Contracting Parties to the Paris Convention. 36 However, the 2004 and 2007 enlargements were mainly composed of the Contracting Parties to the Vienna Convention. 37 Taking nuclear liability into consideration, the new Member States acceded into the Union in four constellations: 1) as a Contracting Party to the Vienna Convention and to the Joint Protocol (which was the case of Estonia, Bulgaria and of the Slovak Republic), 2) as a Contracting Party to both the Vienna Convention and the Joint Protocol and being a Signatory to the Protocol of 1997 at the same time (which was the case of the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Hungary and Poland), 3) as a Contracting Party to the Protocol of 1997 and to the Joint Protocol (which was the case of Latvia and Romania), 4) as a Contracting Party to both the Paris Convention the Joint Protocol and being a Signatory to the Protocol of 2004 at the same time (which was the case of only one “new” Member State, Slovenia). It is a matter of fact that no specific requirements were set concerning nuclear liability during the accession process of the new Member States . On the other hand, until the “eastern” enlargements of the Union, a kind of harmonisation in the area of nuclear liability was reached, as basically all the Member States had been basically Contracting Parties to the Paris Convention. By accession of the “new” Member States to the European Union, the provisions of the Vienna Convention have been “grandfathered” by Article 105 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community. 38 Consequently, neither the 36 However, this is not true for the Joint Protocol. Major European “nuclear” states (in particular Belgium, France, the United Kingdom and Spain) did not ratify the Joint Protocol, which weakens its position as a “bridge” between the Paris and the Vienna liability regimes. For more details see: Reyners, P.: Liability Problems Associated with the Current Patchwork Nuclear Liability Regime within the EU States’, in Pelzer, N. (ed.): Europäisches Atomhaftungsrechtim Umbruch , Nomos Verlag, Baden Baden, 2010, pp. 96 et seq. 37 Slovenia and the two Mediterranean islands of Malta and Cyprus being exceptions. 38 “The provisions of this Treaty shall not be invoked so as to prevent the implementation of agreements or contracts concluded before 1 January 1958 or, for acceding States, before the date of their accession, by a Member State, a person or an undertaking with a third State, an international organisation or a national of a third State where such agreements or contracts have been communicated to the Commission not later than 30 days after the aforesaid dates.”