环境侵权因果关系证明责任倒置研究
发布时间：2018-10-18 17:57
【摘要】：《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》以及《中华人民共和国侵权责任法》,都规定了因果关系证明责任倒置的原则,即加害人自始至终承担因果关系的证明责任。这是我国绝大多数学着对于环境侵权案件因果关系证明的观点；更有一些学者撰文对现行环境侵权证明责任倒置的合理性加以论证。与此同时,一些相反的观点认为,《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》中规定的实质上只是与日本“间接反证法”相似的因果关系推定法。还有的人认为,目前的问题在于笼统地把因果关系作为一个整体进行分配并将其称之为证明责任倒置,这在实践中带来很多混乱。由于目前对于环境侵权案件的因果关系认定理论界还没有达成统一看法,笔者试先对环境侵权因果关系证明责任倒置进行理论分析,进而通过对环境侵权审判实例的分析探讨审判实务中环境侵权因果关系的认定。本文主体内容分为五个部分： 第一部分,以一个典型的,并有争议的案例引出本文的主题,提出了本文需要解决的现实问题。 第二部分,对于环境侵权的概念与特征、环境侵权因果关系的概念与特征进行了分析,并对传统的证明责任分配与证明责任倒置存在的必要性进行了探究。 第三部分,谈到了我国环境侵权因果关系证明责任倒置的立法、司法现状及出现的问题与实务中的做法,引出了因果关系推定的概念。 第四部分,主要是环境侵权诉讼中因果关系证明责任的域外研究,介绍了国外环境侵权因果关系推定的方法,对其作了相应的评价,还谈到了对我国的启示。 第五部分,谈到了在证明责任倒置下环境侵权诉讼因果关系的证明,然后主张将证明责任倒置与因果关系推定有机结合,并设计了具体制度。
[Abstract]:The provisions of the Supreme people's Court on evidence in Civil Litigation and the Tort liability Law of the people's Republic of China all stipulate the principle of reversal of the burden of proof of causality, that is, the offender bears the burden of proof of causality from beginning to end. This is the viewpoint of most of the scholars in our country to prove the causality of environmental tort cases, and some scholars have written articles to prove the rationality of the inversion of the burden of proof of environmental tort. At the same time, some contrary views hold that some provisions of the Supreme people's Court on evidence in civil proceedings are in essence only the causality presumption law similar to the indirect countervailing Law of Japan. Others argue that the current problem is to distribute causality as a whole in general and call it the inversion of the burden of proof, which has led to a lot of confusion in practice. As there has not been a unified view on the causality of environmental tort cases, the author first tries to make a theoretical analysis of the inversion of the burden of proof of environmental tort causality. Through the analysis of environmental tort trial cases, the author discusses the causality of environmental tort in trial practice. The main content of this paper is divided into five parts: the first part, with a typical and controversial case to lead to the theme of this paper, put forward the practical problems that need to be solved in this paper. In the second part, the concept and characteristics of environmental tort, the concept and characteristics of causality of environmental tort are analyzed, and the necessity of the traditional distribution of burden of proof and the existence of inversion of burden of proof is explored. In the third part, the author discusses the legislation, judicial status, problems and practices of environmental tort causality in China, and leads to the concept of presumption of causality. The fourth part is mainly about the extraterritorial study of causality burden of proof in environmental tort litigation. It introduces the methods of presumption of causality of environmental tort in foreign countries, makes corresponding evaluation on it, and also discusses the enlightenment to our country. In the fifth part, the author discusses the proof of causality in environmental tort litigation under the inversion of burden of proof, and then proposes to combine the inversion of burden of proof with the presumption of causality, and designs a concrete system.
【学位授予单位】：南京师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D923;D925.1
本文编号：2279923
[Abstract]:The provisions of the Supreme people's Court on evidence in Civil Litigation and the Tort liability Law of the people's Republic of China all stipulate the principle of reversal of the burden of proof of causality, that is, the offender bears the burden of proof of causality from beginning to end. This is the viewpoint of most of the scholars in our country to prove the causality of environmental tort cases, and some scholars have written articles to prove the rationality of the inversion of the burden of proof of environmental tort. At the same time, some contrary views hold that some provisions of the Supreme people's Court on evidence in civil proceedings are in essence only the causality presumption law similar to the indirect countervailing Law of Japan. Others argue that the current problem is to distribute causality as a whole in general and call it the inversion of the burden of proof, which has led to a lot of confusion in practice. As there has not been a unified view on the causality of environmental tort cases, the author first tries to make a theoretical analysis of the inversion of the burden of proof of environmental tort causality. Through the analysis of environmental tort trial cases, the author discusses the causality of environmental tort in trial practice. The main content of this paper is divided into five parts: the first part, with a typical and controversial case to lead to the theme of this paper, put forward the practical problems that need to be solved in this paper. In the second part, the concept and characteristics of environmental tort, the concept and characteristics of causality of environmental tort are analyzed, and the necessity of the traditional distribution of burden of proof and the existence of inversion of burden of proof is explored. In the third part, the author discusses the legislation, judicial status, problems and practices of environmental tort causality in China, and leads to the concept of presumption of causality. The fourth part is mainly about the extraterritorial study of causality burden of proof in environmental tort litigation. It introduces the methods of presumption of causality of environmental tort in foreign countries, makes corresponding evaluation on it, and also discusses the enlightenment to our country. In the fifth part, the author discusses the proof of causality in environmental tort litigation under the inversion of burden of proof, and then proposes to combine the inversion of burden of proof with the presumption of causality, and designs a concrete system.
【学位授予单位】：南京师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D923;D925.1
【参考文献】
中国期刊全文数据库 前10条
1 刘英明;;环境侵权证明责任倒置合理性论证[J];北方法学;2010年02期
2 胡恋梅;;民事推定与证明责任之关系研究[J];长沙大学学报;2007年01期
3 李俊斌;夏勇子;;环境侵权诉讼证明标准问题研究[J];东岳论丛;2010年07期
4 李浩;民事诉讼证明标准的再思考[J];法商研究(中南政法学院学报);1999年05期
5 杨素娟;论环境侵权诉讼中的因果关系推定[J];法学评论;2003年04期
6 杨阳;;借鉴日本公害诉讼因果关系推定完善我国环境侵权诉讼[J];法制与社会;2007年03期
7 乔世明;;重金属污染因果关系推定理论与实务研究——以广西镉污染为例[J];法治研究;2012年10期
8 钱萍;;浅析我国环境侵权诉讼的举证责任分配原则存在的问题及完善[J];法制与经济(下旬);2012年11期
9 刘自俊;张驭;杨桂萍;;环境侵权因果关系认定方法新探——以谢某诉江苏天楹赛特环保能源集团有限公司大气污染侵权案为背景[J];安徽广播电视大学学报;2013年04期
10 王社坤;;环境侵权因果关系举证责任分配研究——兼论《侵权责任法》第66条的理解与适用[J];河北法学;2011年02期
，本文编号：2279923
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2279923.html
