公私益界分下生态环境侵害惩罚性赔偿的适用研究

A Study on the Applicability of Punitive Damages for Ecological Environmental Violations in the Distinction between Public and Private Interests

在生态环境侵害领域,我国存在并行的三种制度,分别是私益类的一般环境侵权制度和公益类的生态环境损害赔偿制度以及环境民事公益诉讼制度。借助于对环境权本质的探讨,公益类的生态环境侵害问题亦有在民法体系中寻求解决路径的合理性。而惩罚性赔偿作为具备多重功能的民事法律制度,能够助力生态环境侵害制度体系实现其特殊的生态功能及社会效果。同时基于对其适用于公益类案件中理论争议的回应,惩罚性赔偿应作为公私益生态环境侵害问题中的共同规则。但公私益生态环境侵害案件的差异不可忽视,确有必要在公私益区分下对惩罚性赔偿的适用要件进行不同解释,以合理限制公益类生态环境侵害惩罚性赔偿的适用。具体而言,相较于私益类生态环境侵害,公益类生态环境侵害惩罚性赔偿的行为加重要件应采狭义理解;主观加重要件不应纳入“重大过失”。在结果加重要件上,无论公益类还是私益类,都应重新审视对“严重后果”的要求。

In the field of ecological environmental violations,there are three parallel systems,namely the private-interest-oriented general environmental tort system,and the public-interest-oriented ecological environmental damage compensation system and environmental civil public interest litigation system.Through exploration of the essence of environmental rights,the rationality of seeking a solution within the civil law system for public-interest-oriented ecological environmental violations is apparent.Punitive damages,as a multifunctional civil legal system,can assist the ecological environmental violation system in achieving its specific ecological function and social effects.Simultaneously,responding to theoretical controversies regarding its application in public-interest cases,punitive damages should serve as a common rule in both public and private interest ecological environmental violation cases.However,the differences in public and private interest ecological environmental violation cases cannot be ignored.It is necessary to provide different interpretations of the criteria for the application of punitive damages under the distinction between public and private interests,thereby reasonably limiting the application of punitive damages for public-interest-oriented ecological environmental violations.Specifically,compared to private-interest cases,the criteria for aggravation of acts in public-interest cases for punitive damages should be narrowly interpreted.Subjective aggravating factors should not include“gross negligence.”Regarding the aggravating factors in terms of outcomes,whether public or private interest,a reevaluation of the requirement for“serious consequences”is essential.