俄亥俄谷环境联盟诉弗拉公司案对我国的启示  

Inspiration from the Case of Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition v.Fola Coal Company

作　　者：胡红玲 

机构地区：[1]中南大学法学院

出　　处：《常州大学学报（社会科学版）》2018年第1期32-42,共11页Journal of Changzhou University:Social Science Edition

基　　金：教育部哲学社会科学重大课题攻关项目"生态环境保护的公益诉讼机制研究"(12JZD037);国家社会科学基金重点项目"中国特色环境公益诉讼理论与制度研究"(14AFX023);中国法学会部级法学理论研究重点课题"宏观调控程序法律问题研究"[CLS(2011)B07];最高人民检察院检察理论研究重点课题"民事检察监督模式研究"(GJ2011B09)

摘　　要：俄亥俄谷环境联盟诉弗拉公司案是美国典型的原告胜诉的水污染环境公民诉讼案件,完整地展现了美国环境民事公益诉讼的法定程序和论证特点。对该案的一审和二审过程进行分析后不难发现,美国环境公民诉讼从原告对被告的选择,原告执行"诉前通知"到法院依法认定原告资格等司法程序严密有据,法院在庭审过程中对当事人用以支撑己方观点的专家论证意见的采信比较科学合理。鉴于我国环境民事公益诉讼于2013年才正式起步,环境行政公益诉讼于2017年才被写入法律,对美国水污染环境公民诉讼案件进行分析可以给我国的环境公益诉讼立法与司法提供多方面的启示。The case of Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition v.Fola Coal Company is a typical citizen suit in America in which the plantiff succeeded in establishing before the court that the ddefendant violated the permits by discharging pollutants into the river.This case has fully demonstrated the legal procedure and argument features of American public interest civil action for environmental protection.Through the analysis of the first and the second trials of the case,it is found out that the judicial process for American environmental citizen suits are tight and wellfounded,such as the choice of the defendant,the＂notice＂given by the plantiffs before commencing an action,the court＇s finding that plantiffs satisfy the legal standing elements.In addition,the great weight afforded by the court to the qualified experts＇testimony is scientific and reasonable.In view of the fact that environmental public interest civil ligitation in China was first enacted in 2013 and environmental public interest administrative ligitation was embeded in law in 2017.The analysis of American water pollution citizen litigation case can shed light on Chinese legislation and judicial process of environmental public interest ligitation.

关 键 词：美国公民诉讼 诉讼程序 专家证言 环境公益诉讼 

分 类 号：D922.68[政治法律—环境与资源保护法学] D971.2[政治法律—法学] DD915.2