环境侵权中因果关系推定研究

发布时间：2018-02-12 21:56

本文关键词： 环境侵权因果关系因果关系推定举证责任倒置　出处：《烟台大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：工业产业极速发展拉动了我国的经济增长,但也带来了负面效应——环境问题,层出不穷的环境纠纷也随之产生。较普通的民事案件而言,环境领域的诉讼纠纷在确定因果关系方面更为复杂和困难。国外一些国家在环境领域首创并在立法上确立因果关系推定,司法审判机关也一致、广泛地适用推定理论解决因果关系问题,主要包括无因果关系、高度盖然性因果关系、疫学因果关系等具体的推定方法。实际案例的成功解决印证了因果关系推定的证明方法在保护受害人合法利益、降低因果关系证明难度、突破传统理论弊端、平衡当事人权利义务等方面体现出的明显优越性。与国外立法和统一的司法适用不同,我国现行立法规定,在环境领域采用举证责任倒置规则,通过分配诉讼双方当事人需要承担的证明事项来确定是否存在因果关系;司法实践中,审判机关在确定因果关系时,存在多样化的处理方式。部分法院采用举证责任倒置规则;也有法院采纳必然因果关系理论,以当事人提交的证明因果关系的证据能否达到必然性的证明标准作为判断因果关系的准则;更有法院创造性地适用因果关系推定理论,用推定的证明方法认定因果关系是否成立。对比域外国家与我国确定因果关系的不同方法以及所取得的实际效果,分析得出我国存在立法上混淆因果关系推定与举证责任倒置、司法中因果关系证明标准不一致以及受害对象是否负担肯定性因果关系证明责任存在争议等问题。因此提出立法确立因果关系推定、统一司法因果关系证明标准以及明确受害对象不负担任何因果关系证明责任的解决对策。最后,阐述我国环境纠纷案件适用因果关系推定时应遵循的逻辑以及不同特征、类型的环境纠纷适用不同的推定证明方法。期待我国不仅在宏观立法上确立因果关系推定,为法官适用推定理论提供法律依据,而且在微观司法活动中,按照因果关系推定的逻辑,不同特点的纠纷案件采用与之相适应的因果关系推定方法,最终实现公平与效率的双重价值目标以及法理与情理的共存共赢。
[Abstract]:The extremely rapid development of industrial industry has driven the economic growth of our country, but it has also brought about negative effects-environmental problems, and endless environmental disputes. More ordinary civil cases are concerned. Litigation disputes in the field of environment are more complicated and difficult in determining causality. Some foreign countries have pioneered the presumption of causality in the field of environment and established the presumption of causality in legislation. The theory of presumption is widely applied to solve the problem of causality, including non-causation, high probability causality, The successful solution of practical cases proves that the proof method of causality presumption can protect the legitimate interests of victims, reduce the difficulty of proving causality, and break through the drawbacks of traditional theory. Different from foreign legislation and unified judicial application, China's current legislation stipulates that the reversal of the burden of proof is adopted in the field of environment. In judicial practice, there are various ways of dealing with causation in judicial practice. Some courts adopt the rule of inversion of burden of proof. Some courts adopt the theory of inevitable causality and use the evidence submitted by the parties to prove whether the proof of causality can meet the criterion of inevitability. Moreover, some courts creatively apply the theory of presumption of causation. Comparing the different methods of establishing causality between foreign countries and our country and the actual effect obtained, it is concluded that the legislation of our country confuses the presumption of causality with the inversion of the burden of proof. In the judicature, the standard of proof of causality is inconsistent and whether the injured object bears the burden of positive causation is controversial, so the legislation is put forward to establish the presumption of causation. Finally, the paper expounds the logic and different characteristics that should be followed in the application of causality presumption in environmental dispute cases in China. It is expected that our country will not only establish the presumption of causality in macro legislation, but also provide a legal basis for judges to apply the theory of presumption, and in the micro judicial activities, According to the logic of causality presumption, different characteristic dispute cases adopt corresponding causality presumption method, and finally realize the double value goal of fairness and efficiency and the coexistence and win-win of legal theory and reason.
【学位授予单位】：烟台大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.68

【参考文献】