中国环境侵权案件的裁判:举证责任、因果关系和513项法院判决的启示

IF 0.3 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law Pub Date : 2018-11-01 DOI:10.4337/APJEL.2018.02.05
Fan Yang, Ting Zhang, Hao Zhang
{"title":"中国环境侵权案件的裁判:举证责任、因果关系和513项法院判决的启示","authors":"Fan Yang, Ting Zhang, Hao Zhang","doi":"10.4337/APJEL.2018.02.05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Developing countries and countries with economies in transition have varying experiences in enforcing their national environmental law. China's judicial interpretations and legislation on environmental protection have established the rules that shift the burden of proof for causation in environmental tort litigation. However, this study of 513 court decisions from the people's courts at different levels in China shows that although the court decisions usually refer to or quote the rules that shift the burden of proof, in most cases the victim-plaintiffs still bear the liability to prove whether the causal relationship exists between the pollution and the harm. This study also finds that Chinese courts defer greatly to the evaluation report in proving causation. It suggests that the court practice of adjudicating environmental tort cases in China values more the factual causation of a pollution incident than the provisions regarding proof of causation stipulated by relevant laws. Consequently, such judicial practices hinder the effectiveness of judicial remedies for pollution victims in China.","PeriodicalId":41125,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4337/APJEL.2018.02.05","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adjudicating environmental tort cases in China: burden of proof, causation, and insights from 513 court decisions\",\"authors\":\"Fan Yang, Ting Zhang, Hao Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.4337/APJEL.2018.02.05\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Developing countries and countries with economies in transition have varying experiences in enforcing their national environmental law. China's judicial interpretations and legislation on environmental protection have established the rules that shift the burden of proof for causation in environmental tort litigation. However, this study of 513 court decisions from the people's courts at different levels in China shows that although the court decisions usually refer to or quote the rules that shift the burden of proof, in most cases the victim-plaintiffs still bear the liability to prove whether the causal relationship exists between the pollution and the harm. This study also finds that Chinese courts defer greatly to the evaluation report in proving causation. It suggests that the court practice of adjudicating environmental tort cases in China values more the factual causation of a pollution incident than the provisions regarding proof of causation stipulated by relevant laws. Consequently, such judicial practices hinder the effectiveness of judicial remedies for pollution victims in China.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41125,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4337/APJEL.2018.02.05\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4337/APJEL.2018.02.05\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/APJEL.2018.02.05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

发展中国家和经济转型国家在执行本国环境法方面有着不同的经验。我国环境保护司法解释和立法确立了环境侵权诉讼因果关系举证责任转移规则。然而,这项对中国各级人民法院513项法院判决的研究表明,尽管法院判决通常引用或引用转移举证责任的规则,但在大多数情况下,受害者-原告仍然负有证明污染与危害之间是否存在因果关系的责任。本研究还发现,中国法院在证明因果关系时,在很大程度上服从评估报告。这表明,中国法院审理环境侵权案件的实践更重视污染事件的事实因果关系,而不是相关法律规定的因果关系证明条款。因此,这种司法实践阻碍了中国对污染受害者司法救济的有效性。
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
Adjudicating environmental tort cases in China: burden of proof, causation, and insights from 513 court decisions
Developing countries and countries with economies in transition have varying experiences in enforcing their national environmental law. China's judicial interpretations and legislation on environmental protection have established the rules that shift the burden of proof for causation in environmental tort litigation. However, this study of 513 court decisions from the people's courts at different levels in China shows that although the court decisions usually refer to or quote the rules that shift the burden of proof, in most cases the victim-plaintiffs still bear the liability to prove whether the causal relationship exists between the pollution and the harm. This study also finds that Chinese courts defer greatly to the evaluation report in proving causation. It suggests that the court practice of adjudicating environmental tort cases in China values more the factual causation of a pollution incident than the provisions regarding proof of causation stipulated by relevant laws. Consequently, such judicial practices hinder the effectiveness of judicial remedies for pollution victims in China.
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
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law (APJEL) is published in two issues each year by the Australian Centre for Climate and Environmental Law (ACCEL). To subscribe please complete the Subscription form and return to ACCEL.
期刊最新文献
Protection of internally displaced people in South Asia: the role the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) could play in implementing a convention similar to the Kampala Convention Achieving corporate environmental responsibility through emerging sustainability laws Environmental activism by the Philippine Supreme Court: initiatives and impediments Taking stock of REDD+: a consideration of the experiences of Fiji and Ghana Mainstreaming gender in transboundary water governance: a South Asian perspective
×
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