本文選題：環(huán)境侵權(quán)　切入點(diǎn)：因果關(guān)系　出處：《重慶大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：在尋求對環(huán)境保護(hù)的途徑中，如何運(yùn)用法律手段保護(hù)環(huán)境及追究污染者的民事責(zé)任，已成為中國法學(xué)界研究的一大課題。而目前通行的做法是，侵權(quán)行為與損害事實(shí)之間因果關(guān)系為確定污染者的侵權(quán)責(zé)任的前提。關(guān)于認(rèn)定因果關(guān)系的方法與標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，，我國立法與實(shí)踐方面仍然有很多的不足。這使救濟(jì)與保護(hù)污染受害者的合法利益，追究環(huán)境污染者的責(zé)任面臨著極大的困難。 筆者通過本文論述，從介紹環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果關(guān)系的相關(guān)概念，進(jìn)而介紹優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說在環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果關(guān)系推定中的運(yùn)用與發(fā)展，基于對國外一些國家經(jīng)驗(yàn)的研究，細(xì)致的討論了優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說在我們環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果關(guān)系推定中運(yùn)用的相關(guān)完善。希望通過本文可以給未來的環(huán)境侵權(quán)案件的審理帶來些許啟發(fā)與幫助。 除引言與結(jié)語外，本文共分五大部分。 第一部分介紹優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說的緣起及其在環(huán)境法上的發(fā)展。我們現(xiàn)行法律在認(rèn)定環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果上通行的是舉證責(zé)任倒置原則，但是不能滿足復(fù)雜多變的司法實(shí)踐中實(shí)際要求；優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說從其興起到在美國、日本環(huán)境侵權(quán)法上的運(yùn)用與發(fā)展。 第二部分介紹優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說與其他相關(guān)學(xué)說的比較：間接反證說、事實(shí)推定說、疫學(xué)因果說和姑且推定說；進(jìn)一步介紹優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說與其他相關(guān)學(xué)說之間的異同比較。 第三部分介紹優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說在環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果關(guān)系推定中運(yùn)用的規(guī)則與評析。此部分從優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說在環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果關(guān)系推定中運(yùn)用的價(jià)值取向開始，分析了優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說在環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果關(guān)系推定中運(yùn)用的規(guī)則及合理性和存在缺陷。 第四部分介紹優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說在我國環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果關(guān)系推定中的具體運(yùn)用。我們要根據(jù)不同的環(huán)境侵權(quán)類型，選擇適合的因果關(guān)系推定理論；排除損害事實(shí)與污染行為之間存在的其他可能性情況，而不能不分事實(shí)一刀切；通過分析環(huán)境侵權(quán)案件類型，提出必須平衡環(huán)境侵權(quán)加害方與受害方的利益，使社會和諧發(fā)展。 第五部分介紹優(yōu)勢證據(jù)在我國環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果關(guān)系推定中運(yùn)用規(guī)則的完善。在運(yùn)用優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說時不但要排除合理懷疑；不能忽視優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說只是認(rèn)定待證事實(shí)的最低限度；注重對證據(jù)質(zhì)量的評價(jià)；在合宜之時應(yīng)當(dāng)把優(yōu)勢證據(jù)說納入環(huán)境保護(hù)法之中，讓我們的司法實(shí)踐真正有法可依。
[Abstract]:In seeking ways to protect the environment, how to use legal means to protect the environment and investigate the civil liability of polluters has become a major research topic in Chinese legal circles. The causality between tort and the fact of damage is the premise of determining the tort liability of the polluter. There are still many deficiencies in legislation and practice in our country, which makes it very difficult to relieve and protect the legitimate interests of the victims of pollution and to investigate the responsibility of the polluters. In this paper, the author introduces the related concepts of environmental tort causality, and then introduces the application and development of advantage evidence theory in the presumption of environmental tort causality, based on the research on the experience of some foreign countries. This paper discusses the relevant perfection of the advantage evidence theory in the presumption of causality of environmental tort. I hope this paper can bring some inspiration and help to the future environmental tort cases. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into five parts. The first part introduces the origin of the advantage evidence theory and its development in the environmental law. The principle of inversion of the burden of proof is adopted in the current law to identify the environmental tort causality, but it can not meet the practical requirements in the complicated and changeable judicial practice. Advantage evidence theory from its rise to the use and development of environmental tort law in the United States and Japan. The second part introduces the comparison between advantage evidence theory and other relevant theories: indirect reverse theory, fact presumption theory, epidemic causality theory and palliative presumption theory, and further introduces the similarities and differences between advantage evidence theory and other related theories. The third part introduces the rules and comments on the application of advantage evidence theory in the presumption of environmental tort causality. This part begins with the value orientation of advantage evidence theory in environmental tort causality presumption. This paper analyzes the rules, rationality and defects of advantage evidence theory in the presumption of environmental tort causality. The fourth part introduces the specific application of advantage evidence theory in the presumption of causality of environmental tort in China. We should choose the appropriate theory of causality presumption according to different types of environmental tort. By analyzing the types of environmental tort cases, the author puts forward that it is necessary to balance the interests of the injured party and the aggrieved party in order to make the society develop harmoniously. The fifth part introduces the perfection of the application rules of advantage evidence in the presumption of causality of environmental tort in China. Emphasis should be placed on the evaluation of the quality of evidence, and the theory of superior evidence should be brought into the environmental protection law at the appropriate time, so that our judicial practice can really be based on the law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：重慶大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D922.68;D925.13

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 宋宗宇;;環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果關(guān)系判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的理論歧向與體系建構(gòu)[J];重慶大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2009年01期

2 王社坤;;環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果關(guān)系推定理論檢討[J];中國地質(zhì)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2009年02期

3 焦程程;;試析審判實(shí)務(wù)中環(huán)境侵權(quán)因果關(guān)系的認(rèn)定——兼論因果關(guān)系推定與因果關(guān)系舉證責(zé)任倒置的關(guān)系[J];法制與社會;2012年04期

4 鄭顯芳;;再論環(huán)境侵權(quán)行為的舉證責(zé)任[J];河北法學(xué);2009年05期

5 馮嬌雯;;論環(huán)境侵權(quán)中的因果關(guān)系推定[J];溫州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2012年06期

本文編號：1667219