论我国环境法中的排除危害责任

发布时间：2018-03-20 04:23

本文选题：排除危害　切入点：违法性　出处：《山东大学》2010年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】： 排除危害责任最早规定于我国的《环境保护法》,后来在《大气污染防治法》和《水污染防治法》中陆续规定,成为环境污染防治类法律中比较普适的一种责任。由于我国法律规定的不统一以及对排除危害责任规定得过于简单和原则,缺少可操作性,实践中很少适用,得不到应有的重视。因为对保护人们的财产权,尤其是生命健康权来说,承担损害赔偿责任难以达到预防保护的目的,承担损害赔偿责任难以消除人们的精神忧虑,而排除危害责任应该得到适用以此来从根本上保护人们的身体和财产权益。本文主要分为四部分：第一部分,主要从民法的角度介绍了排除危害责任的概念,并从侵权责任的角度分析了排除危害责任的构成要件。环境污染行为、损害和因果关系要件是得到学术界普遍认可的三个要件,有的学者甚至主张三个要件足以构成侵权责任。对于违法性要件则莫衷一是,很难有一个定论。由于环境侵权责任是特殊侵权,过错不是其构成要件之一。同时由于我国法律规定的简单化,排除危害责任的适用缺少实际可操作性。第二部分,主要介绍了我国的环境保护法中与污染防治有密切关系的法律制度,包括：环境标准制度、环境影响评价制度、三同时制度、环境污染事故报告制度等等。环境侵权责任有争议的构成要件之违法性构成要件,违法性涉及的“法”主要指我国的环境污染防治类法律规范。研究我国环境保护法中环境污染防治法律制度的规定及其行政法律责任形式对我国认定排除危害责任的构成及其实现方式有借鉴意义。第三部分,主要介绍了日本、德国和美国的排除危害责任的构成及其实现方式。在日本称排除危害为停止行为请求权,日本主要采用“忍受限度论”的观念糅合了过错、违法性和损害构成要件作为环境侵权责任认定的构成要件。德国采用了利益衡量原则,在一般环境侵权中适用物权救济理论,而在《公害防治法》中则规定了对代表公益的经营设备的倾斜保护,均体现了利益衡量的特点。作为普通法系的美国同样采用衡平法上的“均衡衡平”的理论来讨论禁令(即排除危害)救济的构成与实现方式。各国关于排除危害责任的认定和实现方式无不重视对“利益衡量”原则的重视。第四部分,结合着我国环境污染防治法的法律理念和国外立法的先进经验,论证我国环境侵权责任并不以违法性为构成要件,重构我国排除危害责任的构成要件和实现方式,以期对环境侵权责任尤其是排除危害责任的认定与实现提供参考意见。
[Abstract]:The responsibility for excluding harm was first stipulated in the Environmental Protection Law of our country. Later, it was stipulated in the Air pollution Prevention and Control Law and the Water pollution Prevention and Control Law one after another. It has become a kind of responsibility which is relatively universal in environmental pollution prevention and control law. Because of the disunity of our country's laws and regulations and the too simple and principle of eliminating harm liability, it is lack of maneuverability, and is seldom applied in practice. Not being given the attention it deserves... because for the protection of people's property rights, in particular the right to life and health, it is difficult to assume liability for damage to achieve the purpose of preventive protection, and to assume liability for damage is difficult to allay people's mental worries, The exclusion of harm liability should be applied to fundamentally protect people's physical and property rights and interests. This article is mainly divided into four parts:. The first part mainly introduces the concept of excluding harm liability from the angle of civil law, and analyzes the constitutive elements of excluding harm liability from the angle of tort liability. The elements of damage and causality are generally accepted by the academic community. Some scholars even claim that the three elements are sufficient to constitute tort liability. It is very difficult to draw a conclusion. Because environmental tort liability is a special tort, fault is not one of its constitutive requirements. At the same time, because of the simplification of our country's laws, the application of excluding harm liability lacks practical operability. The second part mainly introduces the legal system which is closely related to pollution prevention and control in China's environmental protection law, including: environmental standard system, environmental impact assessment system, three simultaneous system, Environmental pollution accident reporting system and so on. The illegal constitutive elements of the disputed constitutive elements of environmental tort liability, The "Law" involved in illegality mainly refers to the legal norms of environmental pollution prevention and control in China. Study on the provisions of the legal system of Environmental pollution Prevention and Control in China and the forms of Administrative legal liability for the determination and exclusion of Hazard liability in China. The composition of Ren and its realization are of significance for reference. In the third part, it mainly introduces the constitution and realization of excluding harm liability in Japan, Germany and the United States. In Japan, the exclusion of harm is called the right of claim for cessation, and Japan mainly uses the concept of "tolerance limit theory" to mix fault. Illegality and damage constitute the constitutive elements of environmental tort liability. Germany has adopted the principle of interest measurement and applied the theory of real right relief in general environmental tort. In the "Law on the Prevention and Control of Public hazards", it provides for the protection of the business equipment which represents the public good. The United States, as a common law system, also uses the theory of "equilibrium balance" in equity to discuss the constitution and realization of the remedy of prohibition (that is, the elimination of harm). The recognition and realization of responsibility pay attention to the principle of "measurement of interests". Part 4th, Combined with the legal idea of our country's environmental pollution prevention and control law and the advanced experience of foreign legislation, this paper proves that. The environmental tort liability in our country does not take illegality as the constitutive requirement, and reconstructs the constitutive elements and the reality of excluding the harm liability in our country. In order to provide reference to the recognition and realization of environmental tort liability, especially the exclusion of hazard liability.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D922.6

【参考文献】