作为赔偿的有毒侵权行为:环境污染诉讼的法律地域

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY Geographical Research Pub Date : 2023-01-08 DOI:10.1111/1745-5871.12578
Rupert Legg, Jason Prior
{"title":"作为赔偿的有毒侵权行为:环境污染诉讼的法律地域","authors":"Rupert Legg,&nbsp;Jason Prior","doi":"10.1111/1745-5871.12578","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Residents living in close proximity to contaminated sites may experience adverse effects from financial losses and property devaluation, leading to poor mental health and physical illnesses—effects that may require compensation. The most common legal process of seeking compensation is the toxic tort—litigation pressed on the basis that contamination has harmed the victims. Several recent toxic tort class actions in Australia brought by residents living in areas affected by contamination from per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) exemplify that process. Two such actions, those at Williamtown and Richmond, provide an opportunity to explore how toxic torts currently function as a means to secure compensation, whether they mitigate the harms of the contamination and considering how spatio-legal manoeuvres may shape the litigation. In this article, we use a legal geography approach to analyse how plaintiffs’ bodies, litigants’ properties, and the state are constructed and represented by parties involved in these toxic torts. Legal geographers contend that examining the spatio-legal manoeuvres made via litigation can make visible the effects of legal action on those involved and draw out how the law and its instruments may shape places and communities. Toxic tort class actions have allowed those affected by the contamination to be heard and receive some compensation. However, we argue that they do little to alleviate plaintiffs’ concerns about the effects of contamination on their health, properties, and the environment. The findings have significance given that torts will likely play an increasingly prominent role in dealing with such challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":47233,"journal":{"name":"Geographical Research","volume":"61 2","pages":"234-247"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1745-5871.12578","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toxic torts as compensation: Legal geographies of environmental contamination litigation\",\"authors\":\"Rupert Legg,&nbsp;Jason Prior\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1745-5871.12578\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Residents living in close proximity to contaminated sites may experience adverse effects from financial losses and property devaluation, leading to poor mental health and physical illnesses—effects that may require compensation. The most common legal process of seeking compensation is the toxic tort—litigation pressed on the basis that contamination has harmed the victims. Several recent toxic tort class actions in Australia brought by residents living in areas affected by contamination from per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) exemplify that process. Two such actions, those at Williamtown and Richmond, provide an opportunity to explore how toxic torts currently function as a means to secure compensation, whether they mitigate the harms of the contamination and considering how spatio-legal manoeuvres may shape the litigation. In this article, we use a legal geography approach to analyse how plaintiffs’ bodies, litigants’ properties, and the state are constructed and represented by parties involved in these toxic torts. Legal geographers contend that examining the spatio-legal manoeuvres made via litigation can make visible the effects of legal action on those involved and draw out how the law and its instruments may shape places and communities. Toxic tort class actions have allowed those affected by the contamination to be heard and receive some compensation. However, we argue that they do little to alleviate plaintiffs’ concerns about the effects of contamination on their health, properties, and the environment. The findings have significance given that torts will likely play an increasingly prominent role in dealing with such challenges.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47233,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geographical Research\",\"volume\":\"61 2\",\"pages\":\"234-247\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1745-5871.12578\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geographical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-5871.12578\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geographical Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-5871.12578","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

生活在受污染地点附近的居民可能遭受经济损失和财产贬值的不利影响,导致精神健康状况不佳和身体疾病,这些影响可能需要赔偿。寻求赔偿的最常见的法律程序是有毒侵权诉讼,其依据是污染损害了受害者。居住在受单氟烷基和多氟烷基物质(PFAS)污染影响地区的居民最近在澳大利亚提起的几起有毒侵权集体诉讼就是这一过程的例证。威廉镇和里士满两起这样的诉讼,提供了一个机会来探索有毒侵权行为目前是如何作为一种确保赔偿的手段发挥作用的,它们是否减轻了污染的危害,并考虑空间-法律策略如何影响诉讼。在本文中,我们使用法律地理学的方法来分析原告的身体、诉讼人的财产和国家是如何被建构的,并由这些有毒侵权行为的当事人来代表。法律地理学家认为,研究通过诉讼进行的空间-法律操作可以使法律行动对相关人员的影响可见,并绘制出法律及其工具如何塑造地方和社区。有毒物质侵权集体诉讼使那些受污染影响的人能够发表意见并获得一些赔偿。然而,我们认为,它们几乎不能减轻原告对污染对其健康、财产和环境影响的担忧。鉴于侵权行为可能在应对此类挑战方面发挥越来越重要的作用,这些研究结果具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Toxic torts as compensation: Legal geographies of environmental contamination litigation

Residents living in close proximity to contaminated sites may experience adverse effects from financial losses and property devaluation, leading to poor mental health and physical illnesses—effects that may require compensation. The most common legal process of seeking compensation is the toxic tort—litigation pressed on the basis that contamination has harmed the victims. Several recent toxic tort class actions in Australia brought by residents living in areas affected by contamination from per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) exemplify that process. Two such actions, those at Williamtown and Richmond, provide an opportunity to explore how toxic torts currently function as a means to secure compensation, whether they mitigate the harms of the contamination and considering how spatio-legal manoeuvres may shape the litigation. In this article, we use a legal geography approach to analyse how plaintiffs’ bodies, litigants’ properties, and the state are constructed and represented by parties involved in these toxic torts. Legal geographers contend that examining the spatio-legal manoeuvres made via litigation can make visible the effects of legal action on those involved and draw out how the law and its instruments may shape places and communities. Toxic tort class actions have allowed those affected by the contamination to be heard and receive some compensation. However, we argue that they do little to alleviate plaintiffs’ concerns about the effects of contamination on their health, properties, and the environment. The findings have significance given that torts will likely play an increasingly prominent role in dealing with such challenges.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
12.10%
发文量
0
期刊介绍:
期刊最新文献
Issue Information For everything there is a season … The power of trees: How ancient forests can save us if we let them By Peter Wohlleben, Collingwood: Black Inc. 2023. pp. 271. Vic. 9781760643621 (paperback), 9781743822869 (hardback) Obituary: Janice Monk We are Country—Country mentors us
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1