检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:杨洪 YANG Hong(Guizhou Normal University,Guiyang Guizhou 550025,China)
机构地区:[1]贵州师范大学,贵州贵阳550025
出 处:《湖北函授大学学报》2018年第13期114-115,共2页
摘 要:司法实务中,环境共同侵权案件处理中存在"共同侵权"属性认定认识不统一、根据排放标准划分加害人责任的方法存在质疑等一系列问题。有鉴于此,建议法院在审理案件过程中加强对环境侵权的认定,进一步明确行为人内部责任的划分,对于达标排放的企业的责任认定可适当小于超标排污的企业以及依据《侵权责任法》第8条至第14条有关规定确定环境侵权是共同侵权还是分别侵权后再做进一步处理。In judicial practice,there are a series of problems when handling environmental joint tort cases,such as the inconsistency in the recognition of the attribute of "joint tort",the questioning of the method of dividing the offender's liability according to the emission standards. In view of this,it is suggested that the court reinforce the identification of environmental tort in the process of hearing the case and further clarify the division of the internal responsibility of the actor. The responsibility confirmation of the standard discharge of enterprises can be appropriately lighter than the standard discharge of enterprises,and the court should determine whether the environmental tort is joint tort or independent tort before further processing in accordance with the relevant provisions of the article 8 to article 14 in "Tort Liability Law".
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.63