环境侵权诉讼中原告的举证责任研究

Study on Plaintiff’s Burden of Proof in Environmental Tort Litigation

侵权责任法第66条规定了环境侵权诉讼因果关系举证责任倒置的规则,随着司法审判实践的发展,其遭遇了理论界的质疑和实务界消极抵制的双重困境。为此,最高院于2015年出台司法解释,含蓄指出在环境侵权诉讼中,原告应在被告证明因果关系不存在前承担因果关系存在的初步举证责任。这进一步平衡了原被告双方的举证负担。鉴于环境侵权案件的特殊性,原告初步举证证明标准的原则应为至少“51%心证的盖然性”,在此基础上实行证明标准起点类型化。原告应对环境侵权因果关系链条进行拆解举证,证明方式可包括经验常识、鉴定意见、环境监测值、时间先后关系、疫学方法等。

Article 66 of Tort Law stipulates the rule of inversion of burden of proof for causality in environmental tort litigation, but it is faced with the double dilemma of questioning by theorists and negative resistance of practical circles with the practice of judicial trial. Therefore, a judicial interpretation was issued by the Supreme People’s Court in 2015, which implicitly points out that the plaintiff should bear the initial burden of proof on the existence of causation before the defendant proves that causation does not exist in environmental tort litigation. It further balances the burden of proof of both sides. In view of the particularity of environmental tort cases, the principle of the plaintiff’s standard of proof shall be at least “51% of the possibility of discretional evaluation of evidence” and the starting point of standard of proof should be typed on this basis. The plaintiff should prove by dismantling the causation chain, and the approaches of proof can include common sense, appraisal opinion, environmental monitoring value, time relationship, epidemiology method and so on.