跨界损害损失分担基本理论问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-17 22:14

  本文选题：国际法 + 跨界损害　； 参考：《中国政法大学》2011年博士论文

【摘要】：第二次世界大战以后,科学技术的飞速发展满足了人们不断增长的需求的同时,也给人类带来了无法化解的灾难。石油污染和核泄漏引发的跨界损害给受害者造成的损失和灾难无法用语言描述。在巨大的跨界损害灾难面前,受害者不仅面临巨大的生命、健康和财产损失,就连他们赖以生存的自然和人文社会环境也遭到极大的破坏,甚至毁灭。长期以来,跨界损害的受害者很难得到及时和充分的赔偿。但受害者没有义务承担这种祸从天降的灾难。国际社会已经开始关注到这个问题,并在一些领域中建立了有利于保证对受害者进行及时和充分赔偿的跨界损害损失分担的规则。但这类规则还没有在国际法相关领域中广泛应用,有关规则和制度也还需要进一步完善。 本文在对跨界损害的概念、分类和后果进行细致的梳理以后,从跨界损害损失分担的概念、特征和性质入手,对跨界损害损失分担的基本理论问题进行研究。本文研究的问题包括:跨界损害损失分担的概念及其历史沿革、跨界损害损失分担的法律原则以及跨界损害损失分担的主体模式。论文由导言、正文和结论三部分组成。在写作过程中,我在文献研究的基础上,综合运用法理分析、比较分析、案例分析、历史分析、定性分析、以及跨学科分析等方法,力求高质量地完成该篇论文。 导言部分简要介绍了跨界损害损失分担制度产生的法理基础和伦理基础、论文选题的目的和意义、当前的研究状况、论文的基础思路以及论文的创新点。 跨界损害损失分担源于但又不同于跨界损害责任,它是对跨界损害责任的延伸和发展。其法理基础不是为了对民事责任人行使矫正正义,而是为了实现分配正义。跨界损害损失分担正是基于这样的伦理基础,在不背离污染者付费原则的前提下,把对受害者的赔偿作为起点,逆向设计多重损失分担者的赔偿责任和赔偿义务。不仅由民事责任人承担民事责任,而且,有关受益者或潜在污染者、以及特定情况下的起源国也分担跨界损害的损失,实现对受害者及时和充分的赔偿。 正文第一章是跨界损害损失分担的概念及其历史沿革。在第一节“跨界损害的概念、种类和客体内容”中,首先明确了本文所研究的跨界损害的范围与国际法委员会在讨论该议题时的范围是一致的。跨界损害是指在一国领土上或在其管辖或控制下的地方所从事的危险活动在另一国领土上或在该另一国管辖或控制下的其他地方所造成的人身、财产或环境损害。论文在从跨界损害的致害行为和结果两个方面对跨界损害的特征进行分析以后,接着对跨界损害按照不同的标准进行分类,并指出在不同跨界损害的情况下,应考虑适用适当的风险控制和损失分担机制。在按客体的分类中,指出目前对公域环境保护问题上的种种不足和障碍。 第二节“跨界损害损失分担的概念、特征、性质和意义”中,从对“损失”、“分担”、“损失分担”等含义的剖析,层层递进,分析推导出“跨界损害损失分担”的概念。跨界损害损失分担是为了对受害者进行及时和充分的赔偿,由导致跨界损害的致害活动的经营者或其民事责任人、受益者或潜在污染者、以及特定情况下的起源国等多重主体,按照一定的归责原则和责任序位,对跨界损害的受害者分担赔偿义务的法律机制。跨界损害损失分担不仅是一个概念,更是一个机制,这个机制既包括国际法层面的,也包括国内法层面的;既包括实体法的内容,也包括程序法的内容。在具体的跨界损害案件中,还会涉及国家对外国法院的判决或仲裁机构裁决的承认和执行等司法协助问题,甚至涉及对证据的搜集及认定问题。 跨界损害损失分担制度的出现和不断完善有其历史的必然性。它是在人类社会不断进步,国际法不断发展、国际社会越来越关注跨界损害受害者包括环境权在内的基本人权的过程中逐步建立起来的。跨界损害损失分担制度的形成标志着新的公平正义理念的出现和普遍认同。这种新的公平正义理念,就是不仅要实现利益分配的正义,也要实现损失分担的正义。因此,在跨界损害的情况下,不能只强调污染者付费,不能以强调致害者的民事责任来追求所谓的矫正正义,因为这种正义可能对受害者没有任何裨益。 第三节在沿着国际法委员会对于国家的跨界损害责任及损失分担的研究和审议的脉络进行历史回顾和分析以后,结合有关国际司法实践、现有国际条约和国际环境软法文件,阐述了跨界损害责任的立法概况以及跨界损害损失分担的国际法现状。在当代国际法的跨界损害责任领域,跨界损害损失分担已经在核损害和海上油污损害责任制度中建立起来,但是还没有普及到包括外空损害等有关跨界损害责任制度中。因此,跨界损害损失分担制度的发展在不同的责任领域中并不平衡。 第二章是跨界损害损失分担的法律原则。本章分三节论述了跨界损害的受害者获得及时和充分赔偿的原则、污染者付费原则、以及起源国承担补充保证责任的原则。 在论述跨界损害的受害者获得及时和充分赔偿原则的过程中,首先界定了跨界损害的受害者是“由于一国在其领土上或在其管辖或控制下进行的危险活动在该国以外的另一国领土上或在不属于任何国家管辖的其他地方受到人身、财产或环境损害的人,包括自然人、法人、国家和国际组织”。跨界损害的受害者和国内侵权法中的受害者一样,也是一个历史的概念,它是随着人类社会对某些权利观念的变化、对某些权利的放弃和不断承认新的权利的过程中变化和发展的。 保证对受害者“及时和充分”的赔偿。“及时”是指时间上的“即时性”,这种时间上的即时性是指受害者为了恢复正常的生产和生活,而应当获得尽可能快的赔偿。“充分”是指对赔偿的质和量的要求,“充分赔偿”的含义就是对受害者的赔偿不仅要达到数量的要求,还要达到质量的标准。到目前为止,还没有国际文件对“及时和充分赔偿”的标准进行明确的规定,但有些国际文件对“及时和充分的赔偿”提出了最低的限度。最常用的表述就是使受害者恢复到“如果损害没有发生”之前的状态。 受害者获得及时和充分赔偿的原则必须基于严格责任原则。跨界损害损失分担在引入严格责任的基础上,又辅以连带责任、限额责任、保险或其它财务保证作为保障,使受害者真正获得及时和充分的赔偿。受害者获得及时和充分赔偿的原则已经得到了国际环境文件的肯定和支持。除有关核损害的国际条约以外,有关跨界损害民事责任的国际条约大都把受害者获得及时和充分赔偿的原则作为它们订立条约的目的明确规定在序言或第一条中。保证这一原则目标实现的跨界损害损失分担制度虽然已经在一些领域中得以确立、发展和完善,但作为一个普遍性的制度整体,它仍然是一个动态的发展、变化和完善的过程。 在“污染者付费原则”一节中,首先论述了污染者付费原则的法律内涵,是指造成环境损害的污染者有责任支付赔偿并承担弥补损害的费用。污染者应负的费用包括预防环境污染的费用、停止污染行为和防止污染继续或扩大以及尽速通知的义务、清除污染、恢复环境的费用以及负损害赔偿的费用。跨界损害损失分担没有从污染者付费原则入手,而是以一种逆向思维的方式,从对受害者及时和充分的赔偿入手,逆向设计对受害者的赔偿。但这种逆向设计的制度并不背离污染者付费原则,只不过这里的“费”不是污染者所造成的全部损失。跨界损害损失分担的制度设计并不要求污染者承担所有损失,因为那将对受害者造成实际上的受偿不能,所以只让污染者负担其应当负担且又负担得起的费用。 第三节是“起源国承担补充保证责任的原则”。在这一部分中,首先界定了起源国的概念、责任类型和责任特点。起源国可以具体表述为在其领土上或在其管辖或控制下进行危险活动而引起跨界损害的原因行为的发生国、或危险活动的管辖国或控制国。起源国的责任类型或者是首位全部责任,或者是次位补充责任。首位全部责任最具代表性的就是在外空活动损害中发射国的责任,这种责任通常情况下都不是自己责任,而是一种替代责任。起源国的次位补充责任是指在跨界损害的民事责任人或有关受益人不能履行或不能全部履行赔偿义务的情况下,由起源国对受害人直接承担赔偿义务的形态。起源国不管承担首位全部责任还是次位补充责任,其责任性质和特点都同时包含有补充性和担保性。 起源国责任补充性的法理与国际法基础主要包括三个方面:第一,跨界损害的原因行为是国际法不禁止的非国家行为。第二,污染者付费原则。第三,受益者分担损失。国家环境主权和不损害国外环境权益原则是起源国责任保证性的国际法基础。国家环境主权与不损害国外环境权益原则是国际环境法的基本原则,在性质上属于国际环境法中的强行规范。在国际环境事务中,既要维护国家的环境主权,又不能损害国外环境和相关权益,这是国家环境资源主权与不损害国外环境权益原则的根本要求,也是国际环境法的过程目标和最终目的。 第三章“跨界损害损失分担的主体模式”分为四节。在第一节中论述了分担跨界损害损失多重主体的范围及分担模式,首先结合民法学及侵权法学的有关内容提出并论述了单重主体责任制度和多重主体损失分担制度的概念。多重主体损失分担制度是指在某些侵权领域,法律规定由不同层级的多重义务人分担不同的赔偿义务,每个层级的赔偿义务人只在一定的限额内承担有限责任。分担跨界损害损失的主体包括受害者、民事责任人、受益人及特定情形下的起源国。在这一节中还结合条约和有关的国际实践,论述了跨界损害责任主体从由单重主体承担责任向由多重主体分担损失的变化和发展过程。 多重主体分担跨界损害损失应该说始于跨界核损害责任条约,但是由于跨界海上油污损害事件发生的频率更高,所以,国际社会对油污损害的损失分担给予了更多的关注。因而,在海上油污损害责任领域中,损失分担的制度更加完善,主要体现在以1969年《国际油污损害民事责任公约》及其议定书和1971年《建立国际油污赔偿基金公约》及其议定书中。现在,油污损害和核损害责任制度是多重主体分担跨界损害损失的两个最完善的制度领域,但两者都有各自的特点,代表着目前分担跨界损害损失分担制度的两种模式。其中,跨界油污损害的损失分担模式是通过1969年《油污损害民事责任公约》体系和1971年《建立国际油污赔偿基金公约》双重条约体系建立的,民事责任人的赔偿责任和补充赔偿人的次位赔偿义务规定在不同的条约中。跨界核损害的损失分担是通过单一条约体系建立的,即民事责任人的赔偿责任和补充赔偿人的次位赔偿义务是规定在同一个条约中。这两种模式不仅在立法方式上不同,起源国在分担损失时的地位和作用也不相同。跨界核损害的损失分担者主要是起源国,即有关公约中所指的“装置国”,而海上油污损害的损失分担者主要是相关受益人,即由石油进口商建立的基金分担损失。 本章的第二、三节分别论述了民事责任人和次位损失分担者各自分担跨界损害损失的范围、免责、限额责任、保险保证等内容。最后一节则专门论述了起源国在分担跨界损害损失中的义务。按照国际法,起源国作为在其领土上或在其管辖或控制下进行危险活动的国家,首先应当履行预防原则所要求的一般义务,并从国内法层面上保证有完善的法律机制保证受害者可以获得及时和充分的赔偿。其次,在跨界损害发生或可能发生的紧急情况下,起源国应当履行通知和磋商、采取预防措施及紧急援助的义务。另外,有些国际条约已经明确地赋予了国家作为民事赔偿义务人,承担民事赔偿责任以外的补充赔偿义务。再有,即使在有些情况下,国家既不是民事责任人,也不是赔偿义务人,但国家却承担了赔偿受害者损失的义务,这种义务实际就是国家的国际赔偿责任,尽管在实践中国家常以所谓的“负责任”或“人道援助”的面目出现。 结论部分在总结了全篇文章的主要观点外,进一步指出,跨界损害损失分担制度仍然处于发展和完善过程之中。国家和国际社会都还有许多工作要做。由于国家的国际赔偿责任是国家的一般义务,其义务的确定往往涉及许多不确定的因素。而国家的民事赔偿义务确是具体的、确定的,受害者可以通过民事法律程序实现获得赔偿的权利。因此,为了保证跨界损害的受害者获得及时和充分的赔偿,完善跨界损害损失分担,国家和国际社会都应当致力于研究、制定、完善国家承担民事赔偿义务的有关规范。
[Abstract]:In the wake of the Second World War , the rapid development of science and technology has met the ever - increasing demands of people , and also brought untold suffering to humanity . The loss and disaster caused by transboundary harm caused by oil pollution and nuclear leakage have been greatly undermined and even destroyed . The international community has begun to focus on this problem and has in some areas established rules that are conducive to ensuring timely and adequate compensation for victims . But such rules are not widely used in the relevant fields of international law , and the rules and systems are also needed to be further refined .

After combing the concept , classification and consequence of cross - border damage , this paper studies the basic theory of the loss - sharing of cross - border damage . The thesis consists of three parts : introduction , text and conclusion . In the process of writing , I use the methods of jurisprudence analysis , comparative analysis , case analysis , historical analysis , qualitative analysis and cross - disciplinary analysis .

The introduction part briefly introduces the legal basis and ethical basis of cross - border damage loss sharing system , the purpose and significance of the thesis selection , the current research situation , the paper ' s basic thinking and the innovation point of the paper .

In order to realize the distribution of justice , the loss - sharing of cross - border damage is based on the ethical basis . It is based on the ethical basis that the compensation of the victim as the starting point and the counter - design multiple - loss burden - sharing is based on the ethical basis , and the loss of cross - border damage is shared by the origin of the beneficiary or the potential polluters , and the origin of the specific case , so as to realize prompt and adequate compensation for the victims .

In the first chapter , the concept of transboundary harm and its historical evolution are defined . In the first section , " concept , type and object content of transboundary harm " , it is clear that the scope of transboundary harm studied in this paper is consistent with the scope of international law committee in discussing the topic .

In the second section , " the concept , characteristics , nature and significance of the loss - sharing of transboundary harm " , from the analysis of the meaning of " loss " , " sharing " and " loss sharing " , the author deduces the concept of " cross - border damage loss sharing " . It is not only the content of substantive law but also the content of procedural law .

The emergence and perfection of the loss - sharing system of cross - border damage has its historical inevitability . It is gradually established in the process of progressive development of human society and the constant development of international law . The formation of cross - border damage loss - sharing system marks the emergence and universal identification of new fairness and justice .

In the third section , following the historical review and analysis of the research and consideration of the cross - border damage liability and loss - sharing of the State by the International Law Commission , in the light of the relevant international judicial practice , the existing international treaties and the international environmental soft law documents , this paper expounds the legislative situation of the liability of transboundary harm and the current situation of international law on the loss of transboundary harm . In the field of cross - border damage liability in contemporary international law , the cross - border damage loss sharing has been established in the system of liability for cross - border damage , including outer space damage , etc . Therefore , the development of the cross - border damage loss sharing system is not balanced in different areas of responsibility .

Chapter 2 is the legal principle of the loss - sharing of cross - border damage . This chapter discusses the principle of obtaining prompt and adequate compensation for the victims of transboundary harm , the principle of paying for the polluters , and the principle that the State of origin assumes the responsibility of supplementary guarantee .

In the course of addressing the principle of prompt and full reparation for victims of transboundary harm , it is first defined that the victims of transboundary harm are persons , including natural persons , legal persons , States and international organizations , who are subject to physical , property or environmental damage on the territory of another State other than the country or in other places outside the country , including natural persons , legal persons , States and international organizations .

The term " timely " means the " immediate and adequate " compensation for the victims . " In time " means " temporary " in time , which means that the victims should be compensated as soon as possible in order to resume normal production and life . " Adequate compensation " means that compensation not only meets the requirements of the quantity , but also the standards of quality . " To date , there is no international document that provides the minimum limit for " prompt and adequate compensation " . The most common expression is to restore the victim to " if the damage does not take place " .

The principle of time and full reparation for victims must be based on the principle of strict liability . The principle of loss of cross - border damage should be based on the introduction of strict liability and accompanied by joint liability , limit liability , insurance or other financial guarantees . The principle of obtaining prompt and full reparation for victims has been affirmed and supported by international environmental documents . In addition to international treaties on nuclear damage , the principle of ensuring that the loss - sharing system of cross - border damage achieved by this principle has been established , developed and refined in some areas , but as a whole , it remains a dynamic development , change and improvement process .

In the section of the " polluters payment principle " , the legal connotation of the principle of paying compensation for the polluters is first discussed , which means that the polluters that cause environmental damage have the responsibility to pay compensation and bear the expenses for compensating the damage . The cost of the polluters includes the cost of prevention of environmental pollution , the elimination of pollution , the restoration of the environment , and the cost of negative damages . However , the system design of cross - border damage loss sharing does not require all losses caused by the polluters . However , the system design for the loss - sharing of cross - border damage does not require the polluters to bear all losses , so only the polluters should bear the burden and affordable costs .

In this part , the State of origin may specify the concept , the type of responsibility and the responsibility of the State of origin . The State of origin may be expressed specifically as the State of origin of the cause of transboundary harm caused by hazardous activities in its territory or under its jurisdiction or control .

The principle of national environmental sovereignty and non - damage to foreign environmental rights is the basic principle of international environmental law .

Chapter Three is divided into four sections . In the first section , we discuss the scope and the burden - sharing model of the multi - subject of the loss of cross - border damage . First , the article puts forward and discusses the concept of single - weight subject liability system and multi - subject loss - sharing system in the first section .

The loss - sharing model of transboundary oil pollution damage is established through a single treaty system , namely , the liability of civil liability and the compensation obligation of supplementary compensation are different . The loss - sharing model of transboundary damage is mainly the origin country , namely , the " device country " in the relevant convention , and the loss - sharing of the damage to the oil pollution at sea is mainly concerned beneficiary , namely the fund - sharing loss established by oil importer .

In addition , in some cases , the State is not both a civil liability person and an obligation to compensate the victim . In addition , even in some cases , the State is not a civil liability person or an obligation of compensatory obligations . In addition , even in some cases , the State assumes the obligation to compensate the victim , which is actually the international liability of the State , although in practice the State often appears in the face of the so - called " responsible " or " humanitarian assistance " .

Conclusion Part of this paper summarizes the main viewpoints of the whole article , further points out that the cross - border damage loss - sharing system is still in the process of development and improvement . The State and the international community have much work to do . Because the State ' s international liability is the general obligation of the State , the determination of its obligations often involves many uncertain factors . Therefore , in order to guarantee the prompt and adequate compensation for the victims of transboundary harm , and to improve the burden - sharing of cross - border damage , the State and the international community should devote themselves to the research , development and improvement of the relevant norms of the State ' s civil compensation obligation .

【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D996.9

【参考文献】

中国期刊全文数据库 前10条

1 付翠英;张翠芳;;论私营企业外空商业活动跨界侵权之责任主体[J];北京航空航天大学学报(社会科学版);2010年03期

2 林灿铃;论国际法不加禁止行为所产生的损害性后果的国家责任[J];比较法研究;2000年03期

3 林灿铃;;工业事故跨界影响的国际法分析[J];比较法研究;2007年01期

4 万霞;;跨界损害责任制度的新发展[J];当代法学;2008年01期

5 王竹;杨立新;;侵权责任分担论[J];法学家;2009年05期

6 戚学龙;;论跨界船舶油污损害的国家责任[J];法制与社会;2007年06期

7 杨文杰;;替代责任说质疑[J];法制与社会;2008年31期

8 江伟钰;论跨国自然资源及环境破坏的国家责任和国际赔偿责任确定[J];甘肃政法学院学报;2003年02期

9 张民安;;替代责任的比较研究[J];甘肃政法学院学报;2009年05期

10 黄龙;;民事补充责任研究[J];广西警官高等专科学校学报;2007年04期

，

本文编号：1765523