Font Size: a A A

A Case Study On Causation In Environmental Tort

Posted on:2014-02-01Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:Z H HeFull Text:PDF
GTID:2256330425460551Subject:Law
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
As a special type of tort, the environmental tort differs from common torts with respect to its complex, indirect and long-range characters. The inadequacies of legislation and theoretical research lead to a chaotic situation in China’s legal practice of trialing environmental tort cases. Given the particularities of environmental tort, China’s current environment laws and tort liability laws establish the inversion of the burden of proof and adopt the imputation principle of liability without fault. It provides forceful protection for the rights and interests of the infringed. The legislation, however, fails to formulate explicit provisions to direct the application of the inversion of the burden of proof. Moreover, the existing relevant theoretical researches center overly upon the imputation principle of liability without fault. Theories on the affirmation of causation in environmental tort, as equally important as the above-mentioned two aspects, are relatively neglected in both the legislative and juridical fields. Scholars try to learn from the causation theories of foreign legislation, but remain at some superficial levels and lack of innovative studies. Causation is one of the fundamental elements of tort imputation, and the most complex problem in juridical practices. When processing an environmental tort case, causation affirmation is the key of imputation, and the top priority in applying the allocation of burdens of proof. However, the hysteresis and obscurity of legislation and inadequate supports of theoretical research give rise to problems hindering the causation affirmation and allocation of the burden of proof in environmental tort cases.This case analysis stretches its contents around two disputed points including the particularities of environmental tort causation and theories about the allocation of the burden of proof with regard to causation. Subsequently, the case analysis studies causation issues and analyzes the trial of the selected case from the perspectives of reflecting the existing defects, learning from the foreign theories and considering the jurisprudence values. The plaintiff of this case submitted a plea to the court claiming compensations and accusing that the defendant’s effluents cause the death of their daughter. The defendant, on the other hand, held that its effluents contain no cadmium and the death of plaintiff’s daughter is irrelevant to its actions. Obviously, the key of trialing this case is to allocate the burden of proof through properly applying the inversion of burdens of proof. Due to the defects of current legislation and incompetent theoretical support, judges rigidly applied the inversion of burdens of proof system in this case, which makes the judgment irrational.In the context of rapid economic growth, the number of environmental tort cases would continue to grow. Therefore, the current causation theories and rules of allocation of burdens of proof in environmental tort have to be urgently improved.
Keywords/Search Tags:Environment Tort, Causation, Allocation of Burdens of Proof, Inversion of Burdens of Proof, Causation Presumption
PDF Full Text Request
Related items