非“环境”污染损害的民事法律救济——以污染与损害的二阶因果关系为视角  

Civil legal remedies for non-environmental pollution damage:From the perspective of two-order causality between pollution and damage

作　　者：侯佳儒[1] 刘尉 Hou Jiaru;Liu Wei

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学民商法学院,北京100088

出　　处：《南海法学》2021年第1期61-76,共16页The South China Sea Law Journal

摘　　要：我国民事法律规范引致环境保护法第2条定义“环境侵权”,建筑物、机动车等空间因不属于环境法意义上的“环境”,不能适用环境侵权制度。在实在法层面,非“环境”污染损害可以基于违约责任、产品责任或一般侵权责任进行救济,但面临救济不全和因果关系难以证明的难题。司法实践中,法院对此类案件的认定存在差异。当前“环境侵权”的定义,在一定程度上造成了非“环境”污染损害的救济困境。基于非“环境”污染与环境污染造成损害的间接性以及污染与损害之间的二阶因果关系,环境侵权的制度安排应统摄按照现行定义所区分的“环境”侵权和非“环境”侵权,将因果关系推定规则扩张适用于所有污染行为与损害后果具有间接因果关系的污染致害案件中。The term environmental tort is defined according to Article 2 of the Environmental Protection Law.Because buildings,motor vehicles and other spaces do not belong to the“environment”in the sense of environmental law,the environmental tort law cannot be applied.In positive law,non-environmental pollution damage can be remedied on the basis of liability for breach of contract,product liability or general tort liability.But it’s not complete and causation between pollution and damage is difficult to prove.In judicial practice,courts have also ruled inconsistently in such cases.The current definition of“environmental tort”has,to a certain extent,and the second-order causation,environmental tort law should unify the two aspects divided currently-environmental tort and current non-environmental tort.And presumption of causation should apply to all pollution cases in which there is indirect causation between pollution acts and damage consequences.

关 键 词：环境 污染 因果关系 民事法律救济 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]