Proof Responsibility Of Civil Action For Environmental Torts

After the industrial revolution,human exploitation of natural resources in endlessdigging,digging this excessive exploitation inevitably bring great harm to theenvironment and the burden,so it is natural that in reality shocked the worldNiigata,Japan and Kumamoto Minamata occurred environmental infringement casesincident,India pesticide plant in Bhopal gas leak events.Environmental infringementcases can get the right solution related to the sustainable development of society,theburden of proof at trial allocation is critical environmental tort litigation,which directlyaffects the success and achieve substantive rights litigation.Only a rational allocation ofthe burden of proof,we can ensure a fair and impartial judicial process to be carried outto promote the rational resolve environmental disputes.Due to environmentalinfringement cases has its own characteristics,the original defendant, the two sides areoften economic strength,social status,a significant difference,and in such cases theyinvolve complex technical issues,many important virulence of evidence have beenfirmly in the hands of people. Therefore,the parties at the time of the onus should bedifferent.Due to environmental tort itself has characteristics different from other typesof violations complexity,high-tech,uncertainty,etc.So,the traditional allocation of theburden of proof theory is no longer fully applicable to environmental tort civil cases.Inthe process of solving environmental tort disputes,in the reasonable distribution betweenthe plaintiff and defendant the burden of proof,so as to effectively protect the legitimaterights and interests of the parties is a very important issue around the world areconstantly adjusting and improving the environment in the burden of proof ininfringement proceedings the theory of distribution.In fact,our existing environmentallegislation has the burden of proof of infringement made some provisions,such asinversion of the burden of proof to establish a distribution system,but those provisionsdo not explicitly,in judicial practice,there are many unreasonable.Such legislation doesnot specify allocation principles of burden of proof for environmental torts,the burdenof proof in judicial practice inversion system is also applicable to many problems,thereis no clear evidence of responsibility of both parties,the damage results have identifiedsome limitations,there is no requirement for burden of proof for environmental torts,andso the time limit.In this paper,the analysis and comparative study of domestic and related systems through our environmental burden of proof of infringement of existing legislation andjudicial practice problems,learn from other countries on doctrine and judicial experiencemore valuable place.From the distribution of the burden of proof to establish the basicaction principles of environmental infringement,the burden of proof and reasonable useof the system upside down in the environment of tort litigation,the burden of proof todetermine the scope of the parties,set strict time limits for environmental tort civillitigation proof,sound judicial discretion, etc. the burden of proof on the distribution ofenvironmental torts improve the system,and ultimately make the system capable ofjudicial practice in a lawful and reasonable.