生态修复法律责任之偏见与新识

发布时间：2017-12-28 12:22

本文关键词：生态修复法律责任之偏见与新识　出处：《中国政法大学学报》2017年01期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：在生态文明语境下,建立和完善生态环境损害法律责任制度至关重要。为此,就需要厘清生态环境法律责任的性质、承担方式和救济途径。为此,我们选择了一组论文就此展开专题讨论。《论〈侵权责任法〉第68条之部分连带责任性质》一文从《侵权责任法》第68条性质之争议谈起,分析了"部分连带责任"说的合理性以及环境侵权司法解释与《侵权责任法》之契合之处。《生态修复法律责任之偏见与新识》一文则认为,生态修复法律责任与环境法律责任存在显著区别,在此基础上进一步明确了其法律性质和承担方式。《美国水污染损害评估法制及其借鉴》一文则以比较法视角分析了美国水污染损害评估法律实践及其借鉴意义,进而从法律救济的角度提出了健全和完善我国水污染损害评估法制的对策建议。
[Abstract]:In the context of ecological civilization, it is very important to establish and improve the legal responsibility system of ecological environmental damage. To this end, it is necessary to clarify the nature of the legal responsibility of the ecological environment, the way of undertaking and the way of relief. To this end, we have chosen a group of papers to discuss this topic. On the sixty-eighth part of the tort liability law, the nature of joint and several liability is discussed from the dispute of the sixty-eighth nature of the tort liability law. The rationality of the theory of partial joint liability is analyzed, and the correspondence between the environmental tort judicial interpretation and the tort liability law is analyzed. According to the biases and new understanding of the legal liability of ecological restoration, there is a significant difference between the legal responsibility of ecological restoration and the environmental liability. On this basis, we further clarify the legal nature and the way of commitment. "Water pollution damage assessment system and a" American reference in the perspective of comparative law analysis of the water pollution damage evaluation of American legal practice and its significance, and then from the angle of legal remedy is put forward to improve and perfect the legal system of China's water pollution damage assessment countermeasures.
【作者单位】：安徽大学法学院;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金重大项目——“采煤沉陷区‘生态—经济—社会’多维关系演化规律及调控机制研究”(项目编号:14ZDB145)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D922.68
【正文快照】： 一、引言党的十八届三中全会将生态修复制度的完善作为生态文明制度体系建设的重要内容提出,为我国生态修复法律制度理论与实践探索提供了契机。然而,现阶段我国已有的生态修复法律制度建设多是建立在对生态修复概念的混用、模糊甚至是误解基础之上的。无论是立法中把“恢复

【相似文献】