Indian Civil Nuclear Liability Law (CNLD Act): An Adventurism or Exceptionalism in International Legal Discourse

  • M. P. Ram MohanEmail author


International law relating to nuclear liability has been on a continuous development over the last five decades. On the specific issHiroshima and Nagasaki bombings in Japanue of transboundary nuclear liability law and its applicability, the Chernobyl accident in 1986 steered the international community to address many of the gaps and inconsistencies. The 2011 Fukushima accident in Japan again highlighted the importance of a robust liability regime, both domestically and internationally. Though the effectiveness of these initiatives is still questionable on the issues of universal applicability, quantum of compensation and exceptions, however, countries accepted the basic founding principles as the foundation of the nuclear liability law. India, an established nuclear power country, while re-engaging with world nuclear community subsequent to the 2005 India–United States Nuclear Cooperation, enacted its own nuclear liability law. The Civil Nuclear Liability for Nuclear Damage Act 2010 which was passed after extensive discussion in the Parliament interestingly has both critiques and admirers. Many in India maintain that its liability law reflects Indian public interest and should be seen as a step toward modernizing the nuclear legal regime. Internationally, many argue that the law deviates from the established principles. The chapter undertakes historical evaluation of the development of hazardous liability law in India through tort jurisprudence, maps the civil nuclear liability law making process both at international level and in India and how Indian law stands today, and concludes with the observation that Indian law is an exceptional law.


Civil nuclear liability for nuclear damage act 2010 International nuclear liability law Right of recourse Nuclear insurance Nuclear energy in India 


  1. Abraham M (2011) Right of Recourse: interpretation under Civil Liability for Damage Liability Rules, 2011. Retrieved November 19 2017, from
  2. Abraham M (2011a) Right of recourse: interpretation under civil liability for damage liability rules, web log. Viewed on 19 July 2015
  3. Abraham M (2011b) Whether the new nuclear liability rules are in line with the nuclear civil nuclear liability damage act expert views. Bar and Bench News. Accessed 19 May 2013
  4. Abraham M (2014) Nuclear liability: a key component of the public policy decision to deploy nuclear energy in Southeast Asia. American Society of Arts and Sciences, Cambridge.
  5. Ameye E (2009) Channelling of nuclear third party liability towards the operator: is it sustainable in a developing nuclear world or is there a need for liability of nuclear architects and engineers? In: Proceedings of nuclear. Inter Jura, 5–9 Oct 2009, pp 339–379 (Toronto)Google Scholar
  6. Ameye EM (2015) United States and India: two nuclear states with legislation that truly holds responsible parties liable in case of a nuclear accident. J Risk Res 18(8):1070–1082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anderson DR (1978) Limits on liability: The Price-Anderson Act versus other laws. J Risk Insur 45(4):651–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Banerjee S (2011) Address at the IAEA ministerial conference on nuclear safety, transcript. International Atomic Energy Agency, 20 June 2011. Viewed 27 Mar 2012
  9. Basheer KPM (2010) Nuclear liability bill will clip wings of India’s nuclear technology. The Hindu, August 19. Accessed 22 Apr 2015
  10. Chavan rules out private participation in nuclear power sector (2011) The Hindu, 11 October 2011. Viewed 25 July 2015
  11. Chellaney B (2011) Kill the nuclear liability bill. The Mint, March 10. Accessed 20 May 2015
  12. Cherian J (2010) Safety last. Frontline 27(19)Google Scholar
  13. Chidambaram R (2006) India and the International Atomic Energy Agency. Atoms Peace Int J 1(2–3):137–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Convention of 31st January 1963 Supplementary to the Paris Convention of 29th July 1960, as amended by the additional Protocol of 28th January 1964 and by the Protocol of 16th November 1982Google Scholar
  15. Convention on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency (1986) INFCIRC/336. IAEA, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  16. Convention on Nuclear Safety (1994) INFCIRC/449. IAEA, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  17. Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (1998) INFCIRC/567. IAEA, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  18. Convention on Third Party Liability in the Field of Nuclear Energy of 29th July 1960, as amended by the Additional Protocol of 28th January 1964 and by the Protocol of 16th November 1982Google Scholar
  19. Currie DEJ (2006) The problems and gaps in the nuclear liability conventions and an analysis of how an actual claim would be brought under the current existing treaty regime in the event of a nuclear accident. Denver J Int Law Policy 35(85):91–92Google Scholar
  20. Curtis L (2010) India’s flawed nuclear legislation leaves U.S.–India partnership short. Heritage Foundation. Viewed 24 July 2015
  21. DAE (2005) Cooperation agreement between India and USA on peaceful uses of nuclear energy. DAE. Accessed 24 May 2015
  22. DAE (2005) Joint Statement on India-USA Civil Nuclear Co-operation, viewed May 10 2017, from
  23. Dikshit S (2011) U.S. wants IAEA to Vet Indian liability law. The Hindu, 19 July. Accessed 8 Apr 2015
  24. Divan S, Rosencrantz A (2002) Environmental law and policy in India, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  25. Fischer D (1997) History of the International Atomic Energy Agency: The first forty years. IAEA, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  26. Gopalakrishnan A (2011) Why the nuclear liability rules need to be modified. DNA, 5 Dec 2011. Accessed 22 May 2015
  27. Greenpeace (2010) Soli Sorabjee opinion on civil nuclear liability. Accessed 25 June 2010
  28. Grover RB (2017) The civil liability for nuclear damage act of India: an engineering perspective regarding supplier’s liability. Prog Nucl Energy. Scholar
  29. Grover RB, Chandra S (2006) Scenario for growth of electricity in India. Energy Policy 34:2834–2846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gruendel RJ, Kini RE (2012) Through the looking glass: placing India’s new civil liability regime for nuclear damage in context. Nuclear Law Bulletin 1(89):45–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hariharan A (2011) India’s nuclear civil liability bill and supplier’s liability: one step towards modernizing the outdated international nuclear liability regime. William & Mary Environ Law Policy Rev 36(1):223–255Google Scholar
  32. Hunt CD (1977) Canadian policy and the export of nuclear energy. Univ Tor Law J, 27(1):69–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. IAEA (2007) The 1997 Vienna convention on civil nuclear liability for nuclear damage and 1997 convention on supplementary convention for nuclear damage—explanatory texts, IAEA International Law Series No. 3.
  34. IAEA (2009) The agreement between the government of India and the International Atomic Energy Agency for the application of safeguards to civilian nuclear facilities (INFCIRC/754). IAEA.
  35. IAEA (2010) Statement by Chapika Ranawaka, the Minster of Power and Energy of Sri Lanka, 54th Regular Session of the IAEA General Council transcript, September 20. Accessed 22 Feb 2015
  36. Jigeesh AM (2012) Govt pulled up for diluting civil nuclear liability rules. The Hindu, August 28. Accessed 8 May 2015
  37. Joint-Protocol Relating to the Application of the Vienna Convention and the Paris Convention 1982 (1922) INFCIRC/402. IAEA, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  38. Lok Sabha (2010a) Unstarred question No. 413, transcript, Department of Atomic Energy, 17 May 2012. Viewed 18 Jan 2015
  39. Lok Sabha (2010b) Unstarred question No. 413, transcript, Department of Atomic Energy. Accessed 18 June 2015
  40. Lok Sabha (2010c) Unstarred question No. 2444, transcript, Department of Atomic Energy. Accessed 18 June 2015
  41. Lok Sabha (2011) Unstarred question No. 2228, transcript, Department of Atomic Energy. Accessed 22 June 2011
  42. Marcus GH (2008) The OECD nuclear energy agency at 50. Nuclear News, pp 27–33. Retrieved May 19 2017, from
  43. Matveev A (2006) The Russian approach to nuclear liability. Int J Nucl Law 1(3):270–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McRae B (2007) The convention on supplementary compensation for nuclear damage: catalyst for a global nuclear liability regime. Nucl Law Bull 79(1):17–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. MEA (2015) Frequently Asked Questions and Answers on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act 2010 and related issues. Retrieved March 25, 2017, from
  46. Mohan R (2015) Nuclear energy and liability in South Asia: institutions, legal frameworks and risk assessment within SAARC. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  47. Mukherjee P (2013) Speech by the President of India on the occasion of graduation function of BARC training school Mumbai, Maharashtra.
  48. OECDNEA (2011) Nuclear operator liability amounts & financial security limits. Accessed June 2015
  49. Parliament of India, Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science & Technology, Environment & Forests (2010) 212th report—the civil liability for nuclear damage bill, 2010. Viewed 16 June 2015
  50. Pelzer N (2010) Main features of the revised international regime governing liability-progress and standstill. In: OCED-NEA (ed) International nuclear law: history, evolution and outlook, e-book, OECD/NEA. Viewed 15 Jan 2015Google Scholar
  51. Pelzer N (2011) The Indian Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010—legislation with flaws? Atw. Int J Nucl Power 56(1).
  52. Price-Anderson Act 1957, United States Code Annotated § 2210Google Scholar
  53. Protocol to Amend the Brussels Convention Supplementary to the Paris Convention (29 July 1960)Google Scholar
  54. Protocol to Amend the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage (1997) INFCIRC/566. IAEA, Vienna (2007)Google Scholar
  55. PRS Legislative Research (2010) Legislative brief: the civil liability for nuclear damage bill, 2010. Accessed 15 Apr 2015
  56. PTI (Press Trust of India) (2012) US asks India to consult IAEA on nuclear liability law, December 2. Accessed 25 Apr 2015
  57. Radetzki M (1999) Limitation of third party nuclear liability: Causes, implications and future possibilities. Nucl Law Bulletin 63(1):7–24. Retrieved April 20, 2017, from
  58. Ramachandran R (2010) A supplier’s deal? Frontline 27(24), (Nov 20–Dec 03)Google Scholar
  59. Ram Mohan MP (2009) Legal and regulatory challenges for promotion of civil nuclear energy in India. Energy Secur Insights 4(1):6–10Google Scholar
  60. Ram Mohan MP (2011) How safe is India’s nuclear energy programme? August 23, The MintGoogle Scholar
  61. Ram Mohan MP (2014) Nuclear liability law in India: an appraisal of extent of liability, right of recourse and transboundary applicability. J Risk Res 17(1e2):115e131Google Scholar
  62. Ramachandran R (2011) Limiting liability. Frontline 28(25)Google Scholar
  63. Reyners P (2010) Three international atomic energy codes. In: OECD-NEA (ed) International nuclear law: history, evolution and outlook, e-book. OECD/NEA. Viewed 15 Jan 2015
  64. Schwartz AJ (2006) International nuclear third party liability law: the response to Chernobyl’. In: OECD-NEA (ed) International nuclear law in the post-Chernobyl period, e-book. OECD-NEA and IAEA. Viewed 20 Jan 2015Google Scholar
  65. Schwartz AJ (2010) Liability and compensation for third party damage resulting from a nuclear accident. OECD-NEA (ed) International nuclear law: history, evolution and outlook, e-book. OECD/NEA. Viewed 15 Jan 2015.
  66. Sengupta A (2011) Liability rules leave very little recourse. The Hindu, 1 Dec 2011. Viewed 02 Dec 2015Google Scholar
  67. Sengupta A, Ambast S (2012) A dangerous recourse? A critical relook at Section 17 of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010. J Int Nucl Law 3(4):292–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Srinivasan MR (2012) A liability for our nuclear plans. The Hindu, 15 Oct 2015. Viewed 15 Aug 2015.
  69. The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act 2010 (No. 38 of 2010). Government of IndiaGoogle Scholar
  70. The Hindu (2010) Raise cap in nuclear liability bill to Rs. 10,000 core: left, 13 Aug 2015. Accessed 25 May 2013
  71. USNRC (1975) Reactor Safety Study: An Assessment of Accident Risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants—WASH 1400. Retrieved 28 January 2017, from
  72. USNRC (1990) Final Summary Report, Severe Accident Risks: An Assessment for Five U.S. Nuclear Power Plants- NUREG-1150. Retrieved 28 January 2017, from
  73. Varadarajan S (2010a) This is no way to write a law. The Hindu, August 24. Accessed 17 Feb 2015
  74. Varadarajan S (2010b) Turn the nuclear bill from liability to asset. The Hindu, June 16. Accessed 19 Jan 2015
  75. Varadarajan S (2012) Supreme court to examine constitutional validity of nuclear civil liability law. The Hindu, March 12. Accessed 24 Mar 2015
  76. Yash Thomas Mannully vs Union Of India on 21 Oct 2011Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer (India) Pvt. Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Business Policy AreaIndian Institute of Management AhmedabadAhmedabadIndia

Personalised recommendations