本文選題：環(huán)境公益訴訟 + 訴訟費(fèi)用��； 參考：《湘潭大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：環(huán)境,是人類得以生存的基礎(chǔ),對(duì)環(huán)境的破壞,就像人類殘害自己的身體一樣。然而,部分社會(huì)主體對(duì)此并沒有意識(shí),或者有意識(shí)但存有無(wú)所謂之態(tài)度。他們?cè)诶娴尿?qū)使下,逃避責(zé)任,逃避監(jiān)管,肆意排放污染物,隨意毀壞森林植被。然而,由于監(jiān)管疲軟乏力,致使破壞環(huán)境者難以得到及時(shí)有效的制裁。因此,人們開始通過(guò)法律手段維護(hù)自身環(huán)境權(quán)益,環(huán)境公益訴訟由此誕生。雖然我國(guó)環(huán)境公益訴訟制度已經(jīng)較為完善,但是其并未發(fā)揮其應(yīng)有的作用�，F(xiàn)有費(fèi)用承擔(dān)規(guī)則是阻礙我國(guó)環(huán)境公益訴訟制度發(fā)揮作用的重要因素。不合理的費(fèi)用承擔(dān)規(guī)則使得適格原告需要承擔(dān)大量的費(fèi)用成本,且由于目前我國(guó)符合提起環(huán)境公益訴訟的社會(huì)組織經(jīng)濟(jì)來(lái)源匱乏,其經(jīng)濟(jì)實(shí)力令人堪憂,致使環(huán)境公益訴訟案件難以進(jìn)入訴訟程序、適格原告難以承擔(dān)調(diào)查取證費(fèi)用。這在很大程度上打擊了社會(huì)組織的訴訟積極性,更為嚴(yán)重的是社會(huì)組織可能因支付不起費(fèi)用而放棄訴訟。而檢察機(jī)關(guān)提起環(huán)境公益訴訟還在試點(diǎn)階段,社會(huì)組織目前仍然是我國(guó)環(huán)境公益訴訟的中堅(jiān)力量,一旦其訴訟積極性受到打擊,將影響我國(guó)環(huán)境公益訴訟的發(fā)展。高昂的費(fèi)用成本究其原因在于:其一是環(huán)境公益訴訟案件的標(biāo)的額往往較大,由此產(chǎn)生高昂的案件受理費(fèi);其二是環(huán)境公益訴訟往往會(huì)涉及到復(fù)雜的調(diào)查取證過(guò)程,由此可能產(chǎn)生不菲的鑒定、評(píng)估等費(fèi)用;其三是社會(huì)組織經(jīng)濟(jì)來(lái)源匱乏造成經(jīng)濟(jì)實(shí)力有限,其收入相比較于動(dòng)輒幾萬(wàn)、幾十萬(wàn)的費(fèi)用而言著實(shí)吃力。因此,在目前我國(guó)社會(huì)組織提起環(huán)境公益訴訟遇到費(fèi)用高昂這一瓶頸的情況下,我們需要怎樣完善?應(yīng)當(dāng)采用什么方式和手段來(lái)進(jìn)行?等等問(wèn)題都引起筆者進(jìn)行了深入的思考。本文立足于我國(guó)《訴訟費(fèi)用交納辦法》、《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理環(huán)境民事公益訴訟案件適用法律若干問(wèn)題的解釋》以及相關(guān)法律法規(guī)的規(guī)定,結(jié)合目前我國(guó)適格社會(huì)組織的財(cái)力情況及環(huán)境公益訴訟“公益性”的特點(diǎn),建議將國(guó)家及社會(huì)公眾納入環(huán)境公益訴訟費(fèi)用的負(fù)擔(dān)主體,提出了案件受理費(fèi)按件收取、訴訟費(fèi)用由敗訴方承擔(dān)、原告勝訴時(shí)當(dāng)事人費(fèi)用由被告承擔(dān)、原告敗訴時(shí)當(dāng)事人費(fèi)用由國(guó)家補(bǔ)充承擔(dān)、其他社會(huì)主體通過(guò)捐贈(zèng)行為承擔(dān)訴訟費(fèi)用及當(dāng)事人費(fèi)用的負(fù)擔(dān)規(guī)則,并且提出了費(fèi)用來(lái)源的多元化途徑以保障環(huán)境公益訴訟充分發(fā)揮其作用。望此負(fù)擔(dān)規(guī)則能在一定程度上彌補(bǔ)我國(guó)現(xiàn)有規(guī)則所帶來(lái)的不足。
[Abstract]:Environment, is the basis of human survival, the destruction of the environment, just like human damage to their own bodies. However, some social subjects are not conscious of it or have a conscious but indifferent attitude. Driven by interests, they evade responsibility, escape regulation, release pollutants and destroy forest vegetation at will. Weak regulation, however, makes it difficult for environmentalists to get timely and effective sanctions. Therefore, people began to protect their own environmental rights and interests through legal means, environmental public interest litigation was born. Although China's environmental public interest litigation system has been relatively perfect, but it does not play its due role. The existing cost-bearing rules are an important factor that hinders the system of environmental public interest litigation in our country. Unreasonable cost bearing rules make the suitably plaintiff bear a large amount of cost, and because of the lack of economic resources of social organizations that bring environmental public interest litigation in our country, its economic strength is worrying. As a result, environmental public interest litigation cases are difficult to enter the proceedings, and suitably plaintiffs are difficult to bear the costs of investigation and evidence collection. This greatly dampened the litigation enthusiasm of social organizations, what is more serious is that social organizations may give up litigation because they can't afford to pay the fees. But the procuratorial organ brings the environmental public interest lawsuit is still in the pilot stage, the social organization is still the main force of our country environment public interest lawsuit at present, once its lawsuit enthusiasm is attacked, will affect our country environment public interest lawsuit development. The reason for the high cost lies in: first, the amount of the object of environmental public interest litigation cases is often large, resulting in a high cost of accepting cases; second, environmental public interest litigation often involves complex investigation and evidence collection process. The third is the lack of economic sources of social organizations resulting in limited economic strength, its income compared to tens of thousands of dollars, hundreds of thousands of costs are really difficult. Therefore, in the current social organizations in our country environmental public interest litigation encountered the high cost of the bottleneck, how do we need to improve? What ways and means should be used to do so? And so on the question has caused the author to carry on the thorough ponder. This article is based on our country's procedures for payment of Litigation expenses, the interpretation of some problems in the law applicable to the trial of environmental civil public interest litigation cases by the Supreme people's Court, and the provisions of relevant laws and regulations. Combined with the financial situation of qualified social organizations in our country and the characteristics of "public welfare" in environmental public interest litigation at present, it is suggested that the state and the public should be included in the burden subject of environmental public welfare litigation, and the case acceptance fee should be collected on a piece-by-piece basis. The costs of litigation shall be borne by the losing party, the costs of the parties shall be borne by the defendant when the plaintiff wins the case, the expenses of the party concerned shall be borne by the state when the plaintiff loses the case, and other social subjects shall bear the costs of the litigation and the burden of the party's expenses through the act of donation. And put forward the multiplex way of the cost source to protect the environmental public interest litigation to give full play to its function. It is hoped that this burden rule can make up for the deficiency brought by the existing rules in China to a certain extent.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 蔡守秋;;從環(huán)境權(quán)到國(guó)家環(huán)境保護(hù)義務(wù)和環(huán)境公益訴訟[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2013年06期

2 潘繼材;陳溪;;淺論公益訴訟之訴訟費(fèi)用問(wèn)題[J];法制與社會(huì);2013年22期

3 張穎;;環(huán)境公益訴訟費(fèi)用規(guī)則的思考[J];法學(xué);2013年07期

4 張衛(wèi)平;;民事公益訴訟原則的制度化及實(shí)施研究[J];清華法學(xué);2013年04期

5 邵明;;濫用民事訴權(quán)及其規(guī)制[J];政法論壇;2011年06期

6 張怡;徐石江;;我國(guó)環(huán)境公益訴訟的發(fā)展困境與對(duì)策分析[J];河北法學(xué);2010年12期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 李斯奇;公益訴訟費(fèi)用分擔(dān)方式問(wèn)題研究[D];中南林業(yè)科技大學(xué);2015年

，

本文編號(hào)：1925609