比较中美环境群体诉讼完善我国相关法律制度

发布时间：2018-05-13 19:13

本文选题：集团诉讼 + 代表人诉讼　；参考：《石家庄经济学院》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：我国在经济的快速发展和城市化进程加快的过程中，环境侵权现象也日益严重。它们多由环境污染和生态破坏所造成，并已成为我国的一大社会问题。这些环境纠纷具有涉及人数多、范围广、时间长的特点，极容易引发诉讼参与人数众多的群体诉讼。环境群体诉讼克服了个人单独提起诉讼难以获胜、举证艰难等缺陷，对于防治环境污染与破坏具有重要意义。制度设计方面，美国与我国分别制定了集团诉讼制度和代表人诉讼制度。本文在对两种制度进行比较的基础上，分析了我国现行代表人诉讼制度的弊端，提出完善我国代表人诉讼制度的一些设想。文章除引言和结语外，正文分为以下五部分。第一部分为环境群体诉讼概述。该部分主要运用法理分析的方法，，首先对环境群体诉讼的概念和特点进行了界定与分析，认为环境群体诉讼指因同一或同因的环境侵权行为所造成的环境权利受害者人数众多，由受害者中适格的个别或少数当事人代表一定范围的受害者起诉要求侵权人为或不为一定的行为，法院裁判的效力对代表人及其可以代表的被害者均具有法律约束力的一种特殊的民事诉讼制度。其次，从法理学和法经济学两个层面分析环境群体诉讼的理论基础。最后，指出群体诉讼对解决现代环境污染事件纠纷的理论和实践意义。第一部分是全文的基础，为下文的论述作了铺垫。第二部分阐述美国环境群体诉讼制度——集团诉讼制度。该部分以在环境群体诉讼立法和实践方面较具有代表性的美国为研究对象，分析了美国环境群体诉讼制度——集团诉讼制度的历史沿革、构成要件、类型及程序保障制度，并对其予以评价。本文也是在汲取了美国制度设计的基础上，获取有价值的参考依据，为我国的环境群体诉讼制度和现实问题有针对的分析奠定了基础。第三部分阐述我国现行环境群体诉讼制度——代表人诉讼制度。该部分从我国代表人诉讼制度的出台背景、性质、构成要件及类型四个方面进行深入探讨，全面剖析了我国环境群体诉讼制度。第四部分对中美环境群体诉讼制度加以比较。我国的代表人诉讼制度虽然借鉴了美国集团诉讼制度的合理成分，但在内容上又有创新之处。二者相同点包括均要求人数众多、均可以以集团名义起诉、判决效力均具有扩张性及均要求代表人适格。二者不同点表现在代表人产生方式、代表人权限、判决效力的扩张方式、当事人确定及法院介入诉讼的程度。本章将对其进行重点阐述。第五部分阐述我国环境群体诉讼制度——代表人诉讼制度的弊端及完善设想。在环境纠纷案件中，代表人诉讼的适用遭遇了诸多难题。由于其自身存在缺陷，以及司法环境不容乐观，使得该制度在实践中的适用率并不高。针对此种状况，本文分析了我国代表人诉讼制度运行不良的症结所在，包括诉讼代表人产生程序缺乏科学性、适用条件过于严格及代表人登记制度有待改革。并在考察和借鉴美国相关制度的基础上，对我国代表人诉讼制度的完善提出了一些设想与建议。建议完善如下立法原则：有利于被代表人合法权益原则、有利于发挥代表人作用原则、有利于发挥法院代表国家对多数人进行干预作用的原则。另外从具体法律制度方面提出了改革代表人产生途径、扩大代表人诉讼制度的适用范围、引入“申请退出”机制及制定单独的环境代表人诉讼程序规则的建议。
[Abstract]:In the process of rapid economic development and urbanization , the phenomenon of environmental tort is becoming more and more serious . They are caused by environmental pollution and ecological damage , and have become a major social problem in our country .

The first part is an overview of environmental group litigation . The part mainly defines and analyzes the concept and characteristics of environmental group litigation .

In the second part , the American environmental group litigation system _ group litigation system is described . This part analyzes the historical evolution , constitutive elements , types and procedural safeguard system of American environmental group litigation system _ group litigation system , and evaluates the historical evolution , constitutive elements , types and procedural safeguard system of American environmental group litigation system _ group litigation system . This article also lays a foundation for the analysis of the system and real problems of environmental group litigation in China .

The third part describes the system of litigation system of environmental groups in China . This part probes into the background , character , constitutive elements and types of the representative ' s litigation system in China , and thoroughly analyzes the system of environmental group litigation in China .

The fourth part compares the lawsuit system of Chinese and American environment group . Although the representative litigation system of our country draws on the reasonable composition of the American group litigation system , it has some innovations in the content . Both of them include many requirements , both of which can be sued in the name of the group , and the judgment effect is both expansive and the representative person adapting . The difference points out in the way of the representation , the representative ' s authority , the validity of the judgment , the party ' s determination and the degree of the court ' s intervention lawsuit . This chapter will focus on it .

The fifth part expounds the shortcomings of the system of litigation system of environmental groups in China . In the case of environmental disputes , the application of the representative ' s litigation system has been confronted with a lot of difficulties . In view of the defects of the system and the lack of optimism in the judicial environment , the author puts forward some ideas and suggestions on the perfection of the system of representative human litigation .

【学位授予单位】：石家庄经济学院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D971.2;D925

【参考文献】