论文部分内容阅读
在当今环境侵权风险无处不在的现实语境下,环境“合规”致害现象广泛存在。合规情节能否成为环境侵权案件中的抗辩事由,这一重大理论和实务问题,却因其处在公、私法交叉的边缘地带而未能引起足够的重视,且还时时遭遇传统公、私法划分理论的影响和学界对公共风险的偏见,以及权力利益格局的侵扰。如此重重困境缠绕,犹如古希腊传说中的“戈尔迪之结”。本文以环境合规侵权“戈尔迪之结”的破解为启示,从三则典型的环境合规侵权案件切入,反思我国实在法上的学界通说和司法实践中的事实真相,并在此基础上借鉴日本环境公害法上的“容忍限度”论,对环境侵权案件中“合规抗辩”的法律效力问题进行类型化的技术探讨,以此构建行为人在命令型、禁止型、授权型等不同类型中“合规抗辩”的法律效力,达到破解“戈尔迪之结”的效果。
Under the current ubiquitous environment of environmental infringement, there is widespread environmental harm caused by “compliance”. Whether or not a compliance plot can be a defensive cause in an environmental infringement case has not been given enough attention because of its position in the border between public and private law, and has often encountered traditional public and private law The impact of division theory and academic bias on public risk, as well as the pattern of power interests intrusion. So many dilemma winding, as the ancient Greek legend “Gordian knot ”. Inspired by the crack of environmental compliance infringement and the conclusion of “Gordian”, this paper analyzes three typical cases of environmental compliance infringement, and reflects on the facts of the academic circle and judicial practice in the real law of our country. On this basis, we draw on the theory of “tolerance limit” in Japan’s environmental pollution law to make a technical discussion on the legal effect of “compliance defense ” in environmental infringement cases, Prohibited type, authorized type, such as different types of “compliance defense” legal effect, to break “Goldie knot” effect.