我国环境诉讼证明责任分配制度研究
发布时间：2018-07-20 15:52
【摘要】：古罗马法谚云：“举证之所在,败诉之所在”。此谚虽足以说明诉讼上证明责任的重要性,但从更为宏观长远的角度看,划分证明责任归属的根本目的,则是在于如何通过诉讼上的危险的合理分配,而促使公平正义得以实现的课题。在环境诉讼中,由于环境损害的整体性、隐蔽性、不确定性、长久性以及环境纠纷诉讼当事人的信息不对称性,造成传统诉讼领域的证明责任分配规则已经无力解决这种新兴的现代型诉讼所带来的问题。 本文以此为切入口,系统地探讨了环境诉讼证明责任分配的基本原则与具体规则,以期对环境诉讼的立法趋向和司法实践有所裨益。全文结构如下： 在绪论部分,笔者简单介绍了环境诉讼证明责任分配制度的的研究现状以及研究意义,并提出了本文的研究思路和研究方法,以及本文的创新性探索。在法律公平正义的框架内,如何对我国环境诉讼证明责任分配制度予以构建,这是贯穿全文的一条主线。 第一部分为,环境诉讼证明责任分配之概念分析。本文首先突破目前理论界关于证明责任“双重含义”内涵的认识,提出证明责任“四位一体”的理论内涵,并在此基础上重新对证明责任分配的含义做出界定。此后,在环境诉讼概念界定的基础上,清晰地划分了环境诉讼的类型,试图建立起这座理论大厦的地基。 第二部分为,证明责任分配主要理论学说之剖析。该部分主要介绍了德国的法律要件分类说、危险领域说、盖然性说、损害归属说,美国的肯定事实说、诉答责任说、必须事实说、利益衡量说,以及我国宋世杰教授、陈刚教授、李浩教授、叶自强教授的证明责任分配理论。通过比较分析,本文认为,我国应采用“以法律规定为主,司法裁量为辅”的理论体系。 第三部分为,环境诉讼证明责任分配之基本原则。由于法律原则具有“指导”“评价”“裁判”的功能,所以在探讨环境诉讼证明责任分配具体规则之前,有必要阐述其基本原则。本文通过分析归纳,认为环境诉讼证明责任分配的基本原则应当包括公平公正原则,效益便利原则,诚实信用原则和利益衡平原则。 第四部分为,环境诉讼证明责任分配之法律规定。为了追求法的可预测性的价值,首先应以法律规定为标准来进行证明责任的分配。在前文对环境诉讼类型划分的基础上,该部分着重厘清环境民事诉讼、环境行政诉讼以及环境刑事诉讼证明责任分配规则实然与应然的距离,并相应地对其理论完善和制度安排做了尝试。 第五部分为,环境诉讼证明责任分配之司法裁量。为了追求个案的妥当性的价值,在环境诉讼证明责任分配领域应赋予法官一定的司法裁量权。该部分首先探讨了法官司法裁量的存在原因,并从适用条件、考量因素以及规制程序等方面,如何对法官司法裁量予以合理制约提出了笔者的见解。 在结语部分,笔者指出了本文的研究不足以及自己的期望。证明责任是证据制度的核心、精髓与灵魂,而证明责任分配则是启动司法机制的前提,也是完成诉讼任务的必要条件。本文对环境诉讼证明责任分配制度的研究,只是一种粗略与肤浅的认识,尤其是对环境诉讼证明责任分配之法律规定的论述,可能存在种种不足与缺陷,但愿这些问题可以引起大家的思考。
[Abstract]:The proverb of the ancient Rome Law: "the place where proof is, the place of losing the lawsuit". Although this proverb is enough to explain the importance of the burden of proof in the lawsuit, from a more macroscopic view, the fundamental purpose of dividing the burden of proof is how to make the fair and justice realized through the reasonable allocation of the danger in the lawsuit. In the case of environmental litigation, because of the integrity, concealment, uncertainty, uncertainty, permanence and information asymmetry of the litigants in the environmental dispute litigation, the distribution rules of the burden of proof in the traditional field of litigation have not been able to solve the problems brought about by this new modern lawsuit.
In this paper, the basic principles and specific rules of the distribution of the burden of proof of environmental litigation are systematically discussed in order to benefit the legislative trend of environmental litigation and the judicial practice. The full text structure is as follows:
In the introduction part, the author briefly introduces the research status and research significance of the distribution system of environmental litigation proof responsibility, and puts forward the research ideas and methods of this paper, and the innovative exploration of this article. In the framework of legal fair and justice, how to construct the distribution system of the burden of proof of environmental litigation in our country, this is the intersect. Wear a main line in the full text.
The first part is the concept analysis of the distribution of the burden of proof of environmental litigation. Firstly, this article breaks through the understanding of the connotation of the "double meaning" of the burden of proof at present, and puts forward the theoretical connotation of the "four in one" of the burden of proof, and then defines the meaning of the distribution of the burden of proof. On the basis of this, we clearly divided the types of environmental litigation and tried to build the foundation of this theoretical building.
The second part is the analysis of the main theoretical theory of the burden of proof. This part mainly introduces the German classification of legal elements, the theory of danger, the probability of danger, the doctrine of damage attribution, the affirmative fact of the United States, the theory of the liability for answer, the fact that it must be said, the theory of interest, and the self strength of Professor Song Shijie, Professor Chen Gang, and Professor Li Hao in our country. Through the comparative analysis, the author believes that China should adopt the theoretical system of "giving priority to legal provisions and supplemented by judicial discretion".
The third part is the basic principle of the distribution of the burden of proof in environmental litigation. Since the principle of law has the function of "guiding" "evaluating" "judging" and "referee", it is necessary to elaborate its basic principles before discussing the specific rules of the distribution of the burden of proof in environmental litigation. The principles should include the principle of fairness and justice, the principle of efficiency and convenience, the principle of good faith and the principle of equitable interest.
The fourth part is the legal provision of the distribution of the burden of proof of environmental litigation. In order to pursue the predictability of the law, first of all, it should take the legal provisions as the standard to carry out the distribution of the burden of proof. On the basis of the classification of the types of environmental litigation, this part focuses on the clarification of environmental civil litigation, environmental administrative litigation and environmental criminal litigation. The distance between the distribution rules of the burden of proof and the right should be, and correspondingly, try to perfect its theory and arrange the system.
The fifth part is the judicial discretion of the distribution of the burden of proof of environmental litigation. In order to pursue the value of the appropriateness of the case, the judicial discretion should be given to the judge in the field of the distribution of the burden of proof in the environmental litigation. The author puts forward his views on how to reasonably judge the judicial discretion of judges.
In the concluding part, the author points out the lack of research and his own expectations. The burden of proof is the core of the evidence system, the essence and the soul, and the distribution of the burden of proof is the prerequisite for the initiation of the judicial mechanism and the necessary condition for the completion of the litigation task. The superficial understanding, especially the legal provisions on the distribution of the burden of proof of environmental litigation, may exist a variety of shortcomings and defects, and I hope that these problems can arouse people's thinking.
【学位授予单位】：昆明理工大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D925;D922.68
本文编号：2134035
[Abstract]:The proverb of the ancient Rome Law: "the place where proof is, the place of losing the lawsuit". Although this proverb is enough to explain the importance of the burden of proof in the lawsuit, from a more macroscopic view, the fundamental purpose of dividing the burden of proof is how to make the fair and justice realized through the reasonable allocation of the danger in the lawsuit. In the case of environmental litigation, because of the integrity, concealment, uncertainty, uncertainty, permanence and information asymmetry of the litigants in the environmental dispute litigation, the distribution rules of the burden of proof in the traditional field of litigation have not been able to solve the problems brought about by this new modern lawsuit.
In this paper, the basic principles and specific rules of the distribution of the burden of proof of environmental litigation are systematically discussed in order to benefit the legislative trend of environmental litigation and the judicial practice. The full text structure is as follows:
In the introduction part, the author briefly introduces the research status and research significance of the distribution system of environmental litigation proof responsibility, and puts forward the research ideas and methods of this paper, and the innovative exploration of this article. In the framework of legal fair and justice, how to construct the distribution system of the burden of proof of environmental litigation in our country, this is the intersect. Wear a main line in the full text.
The first part is the concept analysis of the distribution of the burden of proof of environmental litigation. Firstly, this article breaks through the understanding of the connotation of the "double meaning" of the burden of proof at present, and puts forward the theoretical connotation of the "four in one" of the burden of proof, and then defines the meaning of the distribution of the burden of proof. On the basis of this, we clearly divided the types of environmental litigation and tried to build the foundation of this theoretical building.
The second part is the analysis of the main theoretical theory of the burden of proof. This part mainly introduces the German classification of legal elements, the theory of danger, the probability of danger, the doctrine of damage attribution, the affirmative fact of the United States, the theory of the liability for answer, the fact that it must be said, the theory of interest, and the self strength of Professor Song Shijie, Professor Chen Gang, and Professor Li Hao in our country. Through the comparative analysis, the author believes that China should adopt the theoretical system of "giving priority to legal provisions and supplemented by judicial discretion".
The third part is the basic principle of the distribution of the burden of proof in environmental litigation. Since the principle of law has the function of "guiding" "evaluating" "judging" and "referee", it is necessary to elaborate its basic principles before discussing the specific rules of the distribution of the burden of proof in environmental litigation. The principles should include the principle of fairness and justice, the principle of efficiency and convenience, the principle of good faith and the principle of equitable interest.
The fourth part is the legal provision of the distribution of the burden of proof of environmental litigation. In order to pursue the predictability of the law, first of all, it should take the legal provisions as the standard to carry out the distribution of the burden of proof. On the basis of the classification of the types of environmental litigation, this part focuses on the clarification of environmental civil litigation, environmental administrative litigation and environmental criminal litigation. The distance between the distribution rules of the burden of proof and the right should be, and correspondingly, try to perfect its theory and arrange the system.
The fifth part is the judicial discretion of the distribution of the burden of proof of environmental litigation. In order to pursue the value of the appropriateness of the case, the judicial discretion should be given to the judge in the field of the distribution of the burden of proof in the environmental litigation. The author puts forward his views on how to reasonably judge the judicial discretion of judges.
In the concluding part, the author points out the lack of research and his own expectations. The burden of proof is the core of the evidence system, the essence and the soul, and the distribution of the burden of proof is the prerequisite for the initiation of the judicial mechanism and the necessary condition for the completion of the litigation task. The superficial understanding, especially the legal provisions on the distribution of the burden of proof of environmental litigation, may exist a variety of shortcomings and defects, and I hope that these problems can arouse people's thinking.
【学位授予单位】：昆明理工大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D925;D922.68
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 侯利阳;举证责任分配理论之重构[J];北京理工大学学报(社会科学版);2005年01期
2 别涛;;中国环境公益诉讼的立法建议[J];中国地质大学学报(社会科学版);2006年06期
3 李浩;我国民事诉讼中举证责任含义新探[J];西北政法学院学报;1986年03期
4 马栩生,吕忠梅;环境侵权诉讼中的举证责任分配[J];法律科学.西北政法学院学报;2005年02期
5 石静;;试论环境诉讼证明责任[J];法制与社会;2010年18期
6 姜远志;左佳;;证明责任自由裁量权研究[J];辽宁公安司法管理干部学院学报;2006年01期
7 何国萍;;环境公益诉讼的理论解读与制度创新[J];甘肃政法学院学报;2008年03期
8 詹建红;;论环境公益诉讼形态的类型化演进[J];河北法学;2006年08期
9 吕忠梅;;环境诉讼初探——有没有环境诉讼?[J];环境资源法论丛;2003年00期
10 谢伟;环境侵权诉讼举证责任研究[J];中国环境管理丛书;2004年04期
相关硕士学位论文 前3条
1 武从斌;环境民事侵权诉讼举证责任问题研究[D];武汉大学;2004年
2 李泉;环境民事侵权诉论举证责任研究[D];西北民族大学;2007年
3 陈小熊;证明责任分配中的法官自由裁量权[D];厦门大学;2007年
，本文编号：2134035
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/huanjingziyuanfa/2134035.html
