环境公益损害救济诉求下排除危害责任的解释论分析  

Analysis on Interpretive Theories of the Removal of Harmfulness Under the Claim of Environmental Public Interests Damage Relief

作　　者：董岩[1] DONG Yan(School of Humanities and Law,China University of Petroleum,Qingdao Shandong 266580,China)

机构地区：[1]中国石油大学(华东)文法学院,山东青岛266580

出　　处：《法学论坛》2020年第3期151-160,共10页Legal Forum

基　　金：山东省社会科学规划研究项目《环境民事公益侵害阻断程序研究》(17CSPJ04);山东省高校人文社会科学研究计划项目《我国区域碳排放权交易政府监管法律制度研究》(J14WB51)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：在回应环境公益损害救济诉求的过程中,排除危害责任的体系构造与既有的环境行政规制体系功能互补。纯粹私法视角提供的解释框架,存在法律适用、实践后果、理论逻辑等方面的诸多缺陷,无法实现排除危害责任目的、功能与技术逻辑的自洽。以对环境公益产生的危险程度和可能性作为排除危害责任的要件,缺乏明确的判断标准,容易导致风险预防原则的滥用。为此,需要运用比例原则作为分析框架,根据案件性质差异对审查强度进行类型化,确定个案审查强度的裁量要素,厘定面向治理的环境司法与环境行政规制的权力边界。In the process of respondingthe claim of environmental public interests damage relief,the removal of harmfulness liability system can complement existing administrative regulation system in function.The interpretive theory framework from the perspective of pure private law exists many defects in the application of law,practical consequences,theoretical logic and so on.It is impossible to achieve the self-consistency of the purpose,function and technical logic of the removal of harmfulness liability.Taking the degree of danger and dangerous possibility of environmental public interests as the essential elements of the removal of harmfulness liability.Lack of clear judgment criteria can easily lead to abuse of the precautionary principle.The proportional principle need to be applied as the analytical framework,to categorize according to the difference of the nature of the case,decide the discretionary elements of the intensity of case investigation,stipulate the power boundary of justice and administrative regulation oriented to environmental governance.

关 键 词：比例原则 排除危害 环境公益 

分 类 号：D922.6[政治法律—环境与资源保护法学]