Study On The Burden Of Proof Of Causation In Ecological Damage Compensation Lawsuit

In recent years,with the introduction of ecological protection policies,there have been more cases for ecological damage compensation,and some of these cases have been settled by negotiation,while others have entered the lawsuit stage due to failure to negotiate.In legal proceedings involving compensation for ecological damage,there is a need to focus on the burden of proof of causation because it is significant.With reference to the legal provisions,this thesis provides statistics and sorting of judicial cases,and analyses the problems of the burden of proof of causation and its causes in judicial practice,as well as to offer suggestions for enhancement.Besides the introduction and the summary,the main part of this thesis consists of three parts in total.The first part analyses the legal provisions and judicial practice on the burden of proof of causation in ecological damage compensation lawsuit.It includes a review of the relevant legal provisions,a definition of the concepts related to the subject of the study,and an analysis of the general characteristics and specific practices of the sample in judicial practice.The above analysis lays the foundation for the subsequent analysis of the problems in judicial practice and their causes.The second part summarises the issues with the burden of proof for causation in ecological damage compensation lawsuit in judicial practice through case analysis,and analyses the reasons for the problems.Firstly,the courts’ understanding of the nature of ecological damage compensation lawsuit is controversial,and the understanding of the nature of lawsuit will,to a certain extent,affect the application of the rules on the burden of proof for causation.Analyzing the reasons for this,the nature of the lawsuit is private interest lawsuit when understood from the perspective of the private interest lawsuit theory,the state interest lawsuit theory and the private interest public interest lawsuit theory,while the opposite view is reached when understood from the perspective of the public interest lawsuit theory.Secondly,the plaintiff’s side to complete the burden of proof of relevance is the premise of the application of the reversal of the burden of proof of causation,so there is a problem of unclear standards of proof of relevance in judicial practice.This is mainly because the standard of proof of relevance needs to be further clarified and refined.Thirdly,the scope of application of the reversal of the burden of proof for causation is controversial.The reason for this problem is that before the entry into force of the Civil Code,the courts held different views on whether to apply the reversal of the burden of proof by reference,and after the entry into force of the Civil Code,there is room for different interpretations of the scope of application of its Article 1230.In response to the above issues,the third part offers recommendations for improving the burden of proof for causation in ecological damage compensation lawsuit.Firstly,to clarify the special public interest lawsuit nature of ecological damage compensation lawsuit.Secondly,to clarify the standard of proof of relevance in ecological damage compensation lawsuit.Thirdly,to clarify the issues related to the application of the reversal of the burden of proof of causation to ecological damage compensation lawsuit.