2010•Beifang faxueRequires access

Argumentation for the Justification of Reverse Burden of Proof in Environmental Tort

Liu Ying-min

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

In order to alleviate the plaintiff's difficulty in proving the causation between the damages and tortious conduct of the defendant,developed countries have established the causation presumption by various doctrines,cases and legislations.According to the current laws on environmental tort in China,plaintiff's proving difficulty has been much more alleviated by the doctrine of reverse burden of proof.In environmental tort lawsuits,the reverse burden of proof in causation is superior to causation presumption in such aspects as facilitation of providing information;protection of the victim;prevention of pollution;substantial justice;balance of interest;level of difficulty in legislation;the judiciary predictability;and cost of system evolvement.Therefore,in the legislation on environmental tort in our country,the reverse burden of proof in cause should be maintained and there is no need to retrieve to the application of causation presumption.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In order to alleviate the plaintiff's difficulty in proving the causation between the damages and tortious conduct of the defendant,developed countries have established the causation presumption by various doctrines,cases and legislations.According to the current laws on environmental tort in China,plaintiff's proving difficulty has been much more alleviated by the doctrine of reverse burden of proof.In environmental tort lawsuits,the reverse burden of proof in causation is superior to causation presumption in such aspects as facilitation of providing information;protection of the victim;prevention of pollution;substantial justice;balance of interest;level of difficulty in legislation;the judiciary predictability;and cost of system evolvement.Therefore,in the legislation on environmental tort in our country,the reverse burden of proof in cause should be maintained and there is no need to retrieve to the application of causation presumption.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In order to alleviate the plaintiff's difficulty in proving the causation between the damages and tortious conduct of the defendant,developed countries have established the causation presumption by various doctrines,cases and legislations.According to the current laws on environmental tort in China,plaintiff's proving difficulty has been much more alleviated by the doctrine of reverse burden of proof.In environmental tort lawsuits,the reverse burden of proof in causation is superior to causation presumption in such aspects as facilitation of providing information;protection of the victim;prevention of pollution;substantial justice;balance of interest;level of difficulty in legislation;the judiciary predictability;and cost of system evolvement.Therefore,in the legislation on environmental tort in our country,the reverse burden of proof in cause should be maintained and there is no need to retrieve to the application of causation presumption.

Key concepts: Presumption, Causation, Burden of proof, Plaintiff, Tort, Damages, Law and economics, Legislation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Argumentation for the Justification of Reverse Burden of Proof in Environmental Tort — Research Paper | ScholarLens