船舶油污损害连带责任问题研究
|
摘要
随着环境污染与破坏的加剧,环境侵权与民事救济将成为国际的一大社会问题。尤其是船舶碰撞造成的油污染,对人类生存的威胁是巨大的。
发生两船或多船碰撞漏油事故,非漏油一方在该类纠纷之中应否作为责任主体承担赔偿责任,司法实践中一直有争议。特别是因两艘或多艘船舶互有过失碰撞而引起的油污损害纠纷中,非漏油一方应否承担侵权责任,长期以来理论界有不同的理解和认识,法院的处理也各不相同,目前司法实践中有两种主要意见:一是认为应由漏油船单独承担责任,一是认为由非漏油船与漏油船承担连带责任。第一种意见的支持者颇多,很多学者通过传统法学理论中过错——共同侵权——连带责任的公式(承担连带责任的前提是共同侵权,而共同侵权又强调的是过错),认为环境污染侵权中无过错责任原则是唯一的归责原则,不能再适用与之相反的过错责任原则,由此得出无过错原则与连带责任的适用相互排斥的理论,以限制连带责任的适用,笔者认为该观点值得商榷。
不可否认,国际与国内理论界均认为船舶油污侵权不同于适用过错责任原则的一般的侵权,而应视为环境侵权并适用无过错责任原则。但是,船舶油污侵权是一种较为复杂的特殊侵权行为,固守无过错责任原则的单独适用已经不能达到完全保护受害人的合法权益,维护法律公平正义的要求,因此,理论界和实践界迫切需要在归责原则方面通过连带责任的适用来保护船舶油污损害的受害人及其合法权益,从而维护法律的公平和正义。
本文在简要介绍船舶油污损害责任及其适用的归责原则后,拟在理论上、实践上论证船舶油污损害中连带责任适用的可能性和必要性,并探讨这种特殊的连带责任的承担形式,从而建立起完整的有关非漏油船舶是否应当承担连带责任及如何承担连带责任的机制,与此同时,对进一步完善我国的连带责任油污立法和相关民事制度提出建议。
With the worsening of pollution and deterioration of environment, environmental tort and civil remedies will become a big social problem in the world, especially the oil pollution from the collision of ships, it is a huge threat to the human environment.When a collision of two or more ships takes places, whether the ships which not leak oil should be responsibility for the Indemnification of the loss, is always controversial. Especially when it comes to the collision happened because of each other's faultiness. There are always different understanding and different opinion in different scholars. And different court also make different sentence, there are two main judicial opinions now. One is let the ship which leak oil undertake the responsibility alone, another is let all relevant ships in a collision undertake joint liability together. Many scholars support the first one, because of the formula of fault- common infringement- joint liability in classic jurisprudence (It is regarded that the premise of joint liability is common infringement, and common infringement emphasize fault theory). So Principle of Liability without fault is thought to be the unique principle in environmental pollution tort, so the principle of Liability for negligence couldn't be used in it. Therefore, Principle of Liability without fault and joint liability couldn't be used together in environmental pollution tort. But the author holds a different opinion.Undoubtedly, both domestic and international scholars regard that oil pollution tort from ships is different from general torts in which the principle of Liability for negligence could be used, and we should use Principle of Liability Without Fault in it. However, oil pollution tort is so complicated that victim's legal rights could not be completely protected by Principle of Liability Without Fault as time goes by.
Therefore, the System of joint liability is urgent needed to protect victim' s legal rights, then the equity and the justice of the law could be maintained.This paper detailed analysis the principle of liability in marine oil pollution tort and the system of joint liability, to explain the possibility and necessity of joint liability system in marine pollution, and tell the particular way to undertake joint liability. Thereby, an integrity system about whether the ships which not leak oil should undertake the joint liability and how to undertake the joint liability is set up. At the meanwhile, this article also gives suggestions to China on how to perfect its law system in the field of marine oil pollution.
发生两船或多船碰撞漏油事故,非漏油一方在该类纠纷之中应否作为责任主体承担赔偿责任,司法实践中一直有争议。特别是因两艘或多艘船舶互有过失碰撞而引起的油污损害纠纷中,非漏油一方应否承担侵权责任,长期以来理论界有不同的理解和认识,法院的处理也各不相同,目前司法实践中有两种主要意见:一是认为应由漏油船单独承担责任,一是认为由非漏油船与漏油船承担连带责任。第一种意见的支持者颇多,很多学者通过传统法学理论中过错——共同侵权——连带责任的公式(承担连带责任的前提是共同侵权,而共同侵权又强调的是过错),认为环境污染侵权中无过错责任原则是唯一的归责原则,不能再适用与之相反的过错责任原则,由此得出无过错原则与连带责任的适用相互排斥的理论,以限制连带责任的适用,笔者认为该观点值得商榷。
不可否认,国际与国内理论界均认为船舶油污侵权不同于适用过错责任原则的一般的侵权,而应视为环境侵权并适用无过错责任原则。但是,船舶油污侵权是一种较为复杂的特殊侵权行为,固守无过错责任原则的单独适用已经不能达到完全保护受害人的合法权益,维护法律公平正义的要求,因此,理论界和实践界迫切需要在归责原则方面通过连带责任的适用来保护船舶油污损害的受害人及其合法权益,从而维护法律的公平和正义。
本文在简要介绍船舶油污损害责任及其适用的归责原则后,拟在理论上、实践上论证船舶油污损害中连带责任适用的可能性和必要性,并探讨这种特殊的连带责任的承担形式,从而建立起完整的有关非漏油船舶是否应当承担连带责任及如何承担连带责任的机制,与此同时,对进一步完善我国的连带责任油污立法和相关民事制度提出建议。
With the worsening of pollution and deterioration of environment, environmental tort and civil remedies will become a big social problem in the world, especially the oil pollution from the collision of ships, it is a huge threat to the human environment.When a collision of two or more ships takes places, whether the ships which not leak oil should be responsibility for the Indemnification of the loss, is always controversial. Especially when it comes to the collision happened because of each other's faultiness. There are always different understanding and different opinion in different scholars. And different court also make different sentence, there are two main judicial opinions now. One is let the ship which leak oil undertake the responsibility alone, another is let all relevant ships in a collision undertake joint liability together. Many scholars support the first one, because of the formula of fault- common infringement- joint liability in classic jurisprudence (It is regarded that the premise of joint liability is common infringement, and common infringement emphasize fault theory). So Principle of Liability without fault is thought to be the unique principle in environmental pollution tort, so the principle of Liability for negligence couldn't be used in it. Therefore, Principle of Liability without fault and joint liability couldn't be used together in environmental pollution tort. But the author holds a different opinion.Undoubtedly, both domestic and international scholars regard that oil pollution tort from ships is different from general torts in which the principle of Liability for negligence could be used, and we should use Principle of Liability Without Fault in it. However, oil pollution tort is so complicated that victim's legal rights could not be completely protected by Principle of Liability Without Fault as time goes by.
Therefore, the System of joint liability is urgent needed to protect victim' s legal rights, then the equity and the justice of the law could be maintained.This paper detailed analysis the principle of liability in marine oil pollution tort and the system of joint liability, to explain the possibility and necessity of joint liability system in marine pollution, and tell the particular way to undertake joint liability. Thereby, an integrity system about whether the ships which not leak oil should undertake the joint liability and how to undertake the joint liability is set up. At the meanwhile, this article also gives suggestions to China on how to perfect its law system in the field of marine oil pollution.
引文
1.司玉琢等.新编海商法[M].大连:大连海事大学出版社,1999.
2.张新宝.中国侵权行为法[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1995.
3.王利民主编.民法[M]、侵权行为法[M].
4.司玉琢.沿海运输船舶油污损害赔偿若干法律问题研究[J].中国仲裁,2002年第6期.
5.王利民、杨立新.侵权行为法[M].1996.
6.罗伯特.考特、托马斯.尤伦著(张军等译).法和经济学[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1994.
7.王家福主编.中国民法学[M].民法债权.北京:法律出版社.
8.史尚宽著.债法总论[M].北京:法律出版社.
9.梁书文.民事诉讼法适用意见新释[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2001.
10.张文显主编.法理学[M].北京:法律出版社.
11.王利明、杨立新编著.侵权行为法[M].北京:法律出版社.
12.杨立新著.侵权法论[M].长春:吉林人民出版社.
13.陈泉生.环境法原理[M].北京:法律出版社,1997.
14.杨良宜.海事法[M].大连:大连海事大学出版社.
15.曹明德.环境侵权法[M].北京:法律出版社,2000.
16.金瑞林.环境侵权与民事救济——兼论环境立法中存在的问题[J].中国环境科学.1997年第3期
17.张俊浩.民法学原理[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
18.司玉琢.国际海事立法趋势及对策研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2002.
19.张湘兰.海商法资料汇编[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1989.
20.饶中享.船舶碰撞驾驶过失的要素分析法[J].海商法年刊(1993).220
21.司玉琢、朱曾杰.有关海事国际公约与国内法关系的立法建议[J].海商法年刊(1999).大连:大连海事大学出版社.
22.陈克宁.船舶溢油事故与油污损害赔偿法律制度[J].中国船检.2005.3
23.船舶溢油损害索赔与评估的现状与发展浅谈[J].世界海运.1999.1
24.罗从蕤、朱国林.国际油污赔偿系统简析[J].交通环保.1999.12
25.雷孝平、王成峰.关于我国加入“69年责任公约”92年议定书的利弊分析[J].交通环保.1998.19(6)
26.劳辉.关于我国油污赔偿问题[J].交通环保.1996.18(6);1998.19(1)
27.劳辉.《1969年油污责任公约的1992年议定书》将对中国生效[J].交通环保.1999.20(3)
28.浅论海上船舶油污损害赔偿的范围和责任限额制度[J].王江凌.福建政法管理干部学院学报.2003.4(2)
29.金瑞林.环境侵权与民事救济——兼论环境立法中存在的问题[J].中国环境科学.1997.3
30.安树民、曹静.试论环境污染的责任保险[J].中国环境管理.2000.3
31. Marts Jacobsson. The International Compensation System - Recent developments and Challenges. In: international Seminar on Tanker Safety, Pollution Prevention, Spill Response and Compensation. Tokyo, 1999
32. INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON CIVIL LIABILITY FOR OIL POLLUTIONDAMAGE, 1969
33. INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN INTERNATIONALFUND FOR COMPENSATION FOR OIL POLLUTION DAMAGE, 1971
2.张新宝.中国侵权行为法[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1995.
3.王利民主编.民法[M]、侵权行为法[M].
4.司玉琢.沿海运输船舶油污损害赔偿若干法律问题研究[J].中国仲裁,2002年第6期.
5.王利民、杨立新.侵权行为法[M].1996.
6.罗伯特.考特、托马斯.尤伦著(张军等译).法和经济学[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1994.
7.王家福主编.中国民法学[M].民法债权.北京:法律出版社.
8.史尚宽著.债法总论[M].北京:法律出版社.
9.梁书文.民事诉讼法适用意见新释[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2001.
10.张文显主编.法理学[M].北京:法律出版社.
11.王利明、杨立新编著.侵权行为法[M].北京:法律出版社.
12.杨立新著.侵权法论[M].长春:吉林人民出版社.
13.陈泉生.环境法原理[M].北京:法律出版社,1997.
14.杨良宜.海事法[M].大连:大连海事大学出版社.
15.曹明德.环境侵权法[M].北京:法律出版社,2000.
16.金瑞林.环境侵权与民事救济——兼论环境立法中存在的问题[J].中国环境科学.1997年第3期
17.张俊浩.民法学原理[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
18.司玉琢.国际海事立法趋势及对策研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2002.
19.张湘兰.海商法资料汇编[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,1989.
20.饶中享.船舶碰撞驾驶过失的要素分析法[J].海商法年刊(1993).220
21.司玉琢、朱曾杰.有关海事国际公约与国内法关系的立法建议[J].海商法年刊(1999).大连:大连海事大学出版社.
22.陈克宁.船舶溢油事故与油污损害赔偿法律制度[J].中国船检.2005.3
23.船舶溢油损害索赔与评估的现状与发展浅谈[J].世界海运.1999.1
24.罗从蕤、朱国林.国际油污赔偿系统简析[J].交通环保.1999.12
25.雷孝平、王成峰.关于我国加入“69年责任公约”92年议定书的利弊分析[J].交通环保.1998.19(6)
26.劳辉.关于我国油污赔偿问题[J].交通环保.1996.18(6);1998.19(1)
27.劳辉.《1969年油污责任公约的1992年议定书》将对中国生效[J].交通环保.1999.20(3)
28.浅论海上船舶油污损害赔偿的范围和责任限额制度[J].王江凌.福建政法管理干部学院学报.2003.4(2)
29.金瑞林.环境侵权与民事救济——兼论环境立法中存在的问题[J].中国环境科学.1997.3
30.安树民、曹静.试论环境污染的责任保险[J].中国环境管理.2000.3
31. Marts Jacobsson. The International Compensation System - Recent developments and Challenges. In: international Seminar on Tanker Safety, Pollution Prevention, Spill Response and Compensation. Tokyo, 1999
32. INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON CIVIL LIABILITY FOR OIL POLLUTIONDAMAGE, 1969
33. INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN INTERNATIONALFUND FOR COMPENSATION FOR OIL POLLUTION DAMAGE, 1971