生态环境侵权惩罚性赔偿违法性要件的二元结构

On Dual Structure of Illegality of Punitive Damages for Ecological Environmental Tort

否认违法性要件之独立性是当前我国民事侵权领域的通说,然而《民法典》第一千二百三十二条生态环境侵权惩罚性赔偿条款中“违反法律规定”的表述以及《最高人民法院关于审理生态环境侵权纠纷案件适用惩罚性赔偿的解释》第四条的规定在实体法层面承认了独立的违法性要件。结合现有理论观点和实践经验,在生态环境侵权惩罚性赔偿中有限度地承认违法性要件之独立性是立法解释和司法的妥当选择。对于违法性要件之内涵为“结果不法”还是“行为不法”的理论纷争,德国模式本身提供了包容性的解决方案,即二者可以并存并适用于不同类型的侵权纠纷以实现权益的区分保护。在《民法典》生态环境侵权责任的“二元耦合结构”下,环境私益侵权惩罚性赔偿中的违法性要件宜采取“结果不法”的理论,生态环境损害责任惩罚性赔偿中的违法性要件宜作“行为不法”的理解。对于违法性要件中“法”的范围,“结果不法”理论“因符合构成要件而征引违法性”的特点决定了无需对“法”的范围进行特别讨论;在采用“行为不法”理论的情况下,则可以依据法律位阶对“法”的范围进行取舍与选择,实现生态环境侵权惩罚性赔偿之适用范围与惩戒力度的动态调整。

Denying the independence of illegal element used to be a common theory in the field of civil tort in China. However, the independent illegality element has been recognized at the level of substantive law according to Article 1232 inthe Civil Codeand Article 4 in the judicial interpretation. Combined with existing theory and practical experience, it is an appropriate choice for China′s legislative interpretation and judicature to admit the independence of illegality in punitive damages for ecological environmental tort.The German model itself provides an inclusive solution to the theoretical dispute between " illegality of result" and " illegality of conduct", that is, the two can coexist and be applied to different types of torts to achieve differentiated protection for rights and interests. Under the " dual structure" of ecological environmental tort liability inthe Civil Code, the illegality of punitive damages for environmental private rights tort should adopt the theory of " illegality of result", and the illegality element of punitive damages for ecological environment damage liability should be understood as " illegality of conduct". Regarding the scope of " law" in the illegality element, the characteristic of " illegality of result" theory decides that there is no need to discuss the scope of " law". In the case of " illegality of conduct", the scope of " law" can be selected according to the legal hierarchy, so as to realize the dynamic adjustment of the applicable scope and the intensity of punitive damages for environmental tort.