生态修复视域下恢复原状民事责任的构造与拓展

发布时间：2018-06-06 00:33

本文选题：恢复原状 + 环境侵权　；参考：《中南财经政法大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：我国长期以来粗放式经济的发展导致了生态的整体恶化,伴随而生的是近年来环境侵权案件的频频发生。对此,我国立法与司法解释以强化环境侵权责任从而救济受害人、遏止和制裁环境侵权行为、开启生态修复的效果相比以往更为显著。《侵权责任法》因应环境时代下的法律“绿化”的需求将环境污染致人损害这一类型作为独立的特殊侵权类型加以明确规定,但几乎都是对既有的规定之守成,并未有实质性之创新。在环境侵权案件中,恢复原状往往以行政制裁的手段出现,适用在环境民事诉讼中较为少见。《关于审理环境侵权责任纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释》(下文简称《环境侵权司法解释》)并未能有效因应来自于传统民法的恢复原状责任在环境侵权中有效适用的局限性问题,况且其中内容表述多是对恢复原状责任规定的法律语言的高度概括且抽象,具有多义性与不确定性等问题。来自于传统民法的恢复原状责任如何在环境侵权的土壤上体现其价值与功能是不能逾越的重大问题。恢复原状是《民法总则》规定的民事法律责任的承担方式之一,针对的是“物”之损毁,所涉及的也主要为经济损失,其被创设之时并未考虑到人们所享有的生态环境和利益。笔者将其类型化为恢复原状作为损害赔偿标准的存在以及恢复原状作为责任承担方式的存在两种表现形式,因为环境侵权行为有很强的特殊性,以至于环境损害民事责任中的恢复原状与传统民法上的恢复原状大相径庭。笔者通过对恢复原状民事责任适用于环境侵权的大量案例进行类型化并结合学界研究现状,分析发现恢复原状民事责任在环境侵权领域还存在着难以直接适用、难以修复生态等问题。在环境法学中,其理想的价值与功能应该是最大限度地实现生态修复、充分地保护受害者完整利益以及契合损害担责原则。但其有效性还存在合理性和恢复标准两大内容之的探讨。按照上述分析路径,找出恢复原状责任在环境侵权中的拓展之可能,即重塑恢复原状的合理标准、拓展恢复方式。当下研究现状主要表现为立法论的解决方式,笔者认为,目前已经形成了较为规范的环境侵权体系,对恢复原状责任的立法论之研究应该建立在解释论的基础之上,故而本文以法律条文为研究起点,结合司法判例及学理分析并配之以域外比较分析,旨在厘清恢复原状之传统民法和环境法中的构造,并探究其在生态修复视域下的恢复方式及合理标准的拓展,从而为未来相关立法与法律适用提供镜鉴。
[Abstract]:The development of extensive economy in China has led to the deterioration of ecology for a long time, accompanied by the frequent occurrence of environmental tort cases in recent years. In view of this, the legislative and judicial interpretation of our country is aimed at strengthening the liability for environmental tort, so as to relieve the victims, and to curb and sanction the environmental tort. The effect of opening ecological restoration is more remarkable than before. According to the requirement of "greening" of the law under the environment era, the tort liability law explicitly stipulates that the damage caused by environmental pollution is a kind of independent special tort type. But almost all are to the existing stipulation's fulfillment, did not have the substantive innovation. In environmental tort cases, restitution often occurs by means of administrative sanctions. Application in environmental civil litigation is relatively rare. The interpretation of some problems of applicable Law in Environmental Tort dispute cases (hereinafter referred to as "Judicial explanation of Environmental Tort") has not been able to respond effectively to the problems arising from the traditional civil law. The limitation of the effective application of restitution liability in environmental tort, Moreover, the content is mostly summarized and abstracted by the legal language of restitution liability, and it has many problems such as polysemy and uncertainty. How to reflect the value and function of restitution responsibility in the soil of environmental tort is an insurmountable problem. Restitution is one of the ways to assume civil legal liability stipulated in the General principles of Civil Law. It is aimed at the damage of "things", and involves mainly economic losses, which did not take into account the ecological environment and interests enjoyed by people when it was created. The author classifies it into the existence of restitution as a standard of compensation for damages and the existence of restitution as a way of assuming responsibility because of the strong particularity of environmental tort. Therefore, restitution in civil liability for environmental damage is quite different from that in traditional civil law. Through the typology of a large number of cases of restitution civil liability applicable to environmental tort and combined with the current situation of academic research, the author finds that restitution civil liability is difficult to directly apply in the field of environmental tort. Difficult to repair ecological and other problems. In environmental law, its ideal value and function should be to realize ecological restoration to the maximum extent, to fully protect the complete interests of victims and to fit the principle of liability for damage. However, the validity of the two major contents of rationality and recovery criteria are discussed. According to the above analysis path, this paper finds out the possibility of the expansion of restitution liability in environmental tort, that is, remolding the reasonable standard of restitution and expanding the recovery mode. The current research situation is mainly manifested in the solution of legislation theory. The author believes that a more standard environmental tort system has been formed at present, and the research on the legislative theory of restitution responsibility should be based on the theory of explanation. Therefore, this article takes the legal text as the research starting point, unifies the judicial precedent and the theory analysis and matches it with the extraterritorial comparative analysis, in order to clarify the structure of the traditional civil law and the environmental law of restitution. It also explores the ways of restoration and the development of reasonable standards under the view of ecological restoration, thus providing a mirror for the future relevant legislation and legal application.
【学位授予单位】：中南财经政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.68

【参考文献】