环境侵权中的因果关系及其证明问题评析  

On the Causation and Its Proof in Environmental Tort

作　　者：胡学军[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]南昌大学法学院 [2]南昌大学立法研究中心

出　　处：《中国法学》2013年第5期163-177,共15页China Legal Science

基　　金：江西省高校重点学科建设基金资助;国家社科基金一般项目"民事证明责任的实证考察与制度重构"(编号13BFX069)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：我国环境侵权诉讼证明责任倒置的规定在司法实践中遭遇消极抵制,表明这并非解决环境侵权中因果关系证明难问题的正解。原因在于将环境侵权中的因果关系界定为传统民法理论中的必然因果关系使其无法在司法实践中予以证实。西方发达国家在现代化早期对于环境侵权中的因果关系在司法实践中探索总结了盖然因果关系、表面因果关系、疫学因果关系等多种理论及与此相关的事实推定、间接反证、概率统计等多种证明方法,值得我国借鉴。这些学说的共同点是使得受害人在环境侵权诉讼中的因果关系证明负担得以减轻,而并非直接实行证明责任倒置。环境侵权中的因果关系应界定为逻辑上属部分因果关系,在法学上属相当因果关系。唯有如此界定才能使因果关系的证明成为可能,在这一方面,比较法上的一系列配套证明制度也值得我们认真关注与借鉴。The been passively rejec provisions on Inversion of the burden of proof in China＇s environmental tort litigation have ted in judicial practices, and this indicates that these provisions cannot solve the issue that it is diffieult to prove the eausation in environmental tort. The reason is the causation in environmental tort has been defined as positive causal relationship in traditional civil law theories, so that it cannot be proved in judi- cial practices. Western developed eountries have explored the causation in environmental tort in the early stage of modernization, and summarized the probability eausation, surface of causation, immunology causal relations theory, and related presumption of fact, indireet evidenee to the contrary, and probability and statistics. All these theories should be borrowed and studied by China. The eommon point of these theories is to reduce the burden of vietims to prove causation in environmental tort litigations rather than inversing the burden of proof. The causation in environmental tort should be defined as a partial causation in logic and adequate causation in legal science. Only this definition can make the proof of causation possible. In addition, we should also borrow and study a series of supporting proof systems in comparative law.

关 键 词：环境侵权证明责任倒置部分因果关系 相当因果关系 证明方法 

分 类 号：D922.68[政治法律—环境与资源保护法学] D925.1[政治法律—法学]