美国环境健康损害赔偿立法及其对我国的启示  

Legislation on TheEnvironmental Health Damage Compensation in the USA and Reference to China

作　　者：于文轩[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学,北京100088

出　　处：《环境与可持续发展》2011年第3期57-62,共6页Environment and Sustainable Development

基　　金：2010年国家环保公益课题"环境重金属污染健康损害补偿标准及指标体系研究"(项目编号:201009044);中国法学会十大专项研究规划项目"促进经济又好又快和可持续发展的法律问题研究"(项目编号:CLS10-9)

摘　　要：美国尚未制定专门的环境健康损害赔偿立法。由环境保护法律中的相关规定、涉及环境侵权赔偿或者补偿的相关立法以及环境健康损害赔偿典型判例构成的法规体系,为环境健康保护提供了重要的法律依据。从《超级基金法》、《詹姆斯.扎德加9.11健康与赔偿法案》、《联邦侵权赔偿法》和《联邦雇员补偿法》等立法以及Sterling诉Velsicol化学公司案、普莱斯诉美国海军案等判例中总结的美国经验主要包括:适时制定专门立法;建立损害赔偿社会化机制;适用惩罚性赔偿机制;科学确定赔偿范围和数额;明确公职人员的法律责任。我国应当基于自身国情,充分借鉴美国的成熟经验,加快环境健康损害赔偿立法进程。There is no special legislation on environmental health damage compensation in the USA. The stipulations in some environmental protection laws, the legislations related to compensation for environmental torts and some typical precedents provide important legal basis for environmental health protection. From the Super Fund Act, James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, Federal Tort Claims Act and Federal Employee Compensation Act, and Sterling v. Velsicol Chemical Corp., Price v. US Navy, some helpful experiences can be concluded include： establishing specialized legislation; socializing the damage compensation; adopting the exemplary damages; clearly defining the scope and amount of compensation; and ruling the legal liability of civil serv- ants. China should promote the legislation on environmental health damage compensation based on the practical demands and with reference to the successful experience of the USA.

关 键 词：环境健康 损害赔偿 立法 美国经验 

分 类 号：D971.2[政治法律—法学] DD912.6DD913