精品偷拍一区二区三区,亚洲精品永久 码,亚洲综合日韩精品欧美国产,亚洲国产日韩a在线亚洲

  • <center id="usuqs"></center>
  • 
    
  • 英語(yǔ)翻譯

    英語(yǔ)翻譯
    環(huán)境權(quán)還是應(yīng)當(dāng)停留在公法的角度上去逐步完善和確立,環(huán)境權(quán)是由環(huán)境法來(lái)確立和維護(hù)的,環(huán)境法是以保護(hù)環(huán)境為己任,是以保護(hù)公眾的環(huán)境利益為重要目的的,因此,其具有社會(huì)權(quán)的性質(zhì).與此同時(shí),試圖以所謂的環(huán)境權(quán)來(lái)代替民法中業(yè)已存在的財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)及人格權(quán),不僅導(dǎo)致民事權(quán)利設(shè)置的重復(fù)、混亂,也不利于真正地確立環(huán)境權(quán).因此,環(huán)境權(quán)的損害賠償也僅是以民事侵權(quán)來(lái)恒定而已.在研究目前國(guó)際形勢(shì)下的環(huán)境權(quán)發(fā)展趨勢(shì)來(lái)看,在歐洲發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家環(huán)境法中,普遍可以找到對(duì)個(gè)人財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)利的嚴(yán)格禁止條款,有難以計(jì)數(shù)的關(guān)于許可、許可證、配額、時(shí)間和空間的限制、環(huán)境評(píng)價(jià)等方面的法律條文.這些限制和禁止性條款的設(shè)定,在于通過(guò)限制個(gè)人財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)利來(lái)達(dá)到加強(qiáng)環(huán)境共享權(quán)的目標(biāo).由此可見(jiàn),這些限制性的條款,其主要目標(biāo)在于通過(guò)限制個(gè)人私權(quán)而將社會(huì)公益最大化,并非出于保障私權(quán)甚至是將環(huán)境權(quán)私權(quán)化的意圖,而部分學(xué)者甚至已經(jīng)提出了“環(huán)境烏托邦”即在人類(lèi)的法律中,賦予除人類(lèi)以外的其他物種以平等的法律地位并同樣切實(shí)保障其環(huán)境權(quán)的做法,在此情況下,還能簡(jiǎn)單的將環(huán)境權(quán)私權(quán)化嗎?因此,當(dāng)前環(huán)境權(quán)的私法化尚不成熟,在面對(duì)許多現(xiàn)實(shí)問(wèn)題時(shí)還不能很好的解決爭(zhēng)端.
    接著上文的論述,環(huán)境權(quán)的私法化很大程度上是想確立一種預(yù)防性的機(jī)制,彌補(bǔ)以往《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》中所規(guī)定的環(huán)境侵權(quán)只能在損害發(fā)生后才能補(bǔ)救的弊端,同時(shí),希望借助于將環(huán)境權(quán)置于與財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)等私權(quán)并列或者類(lèi)似的地位,以求立法從正向?qū)ζ溥M(jìn)行保護(hù).但是,如果將環(huán)境權(quán)放置于像財(cái)產(chǎn)權(quán)帶有私人屬性的權(quán)利,以期借助市場(chǎng)的力量去自行調(diào)節(jié)利益關(guān)系,達(dá)到效用最大化的目的,其實(shí)是行不通的.市場(chǎng)雖然是有效率的,但是也會(huì)經(jīng)常性的出現(xiàn)“市場(chǎng)失靈”,環(huán)境資源作為一種公共物品 ( public goods),不具有消費(fèi)的排他性,而且這種消費(fèi)的代價(jià)通常是低廉的或無(wú)償?shù)?環(huán)境資源的這種特性會(huì)引起需求與供給無(wú)法自動(dòng)通過(guò)市場(chǎng)機(jī)制相互適應(yīng)的問(wèn)題,而且環(huán)境問(wèn)題本身屬于“外部性問(wèn)題”,在不進(jìn)行行政干預(yù)的情況下反而會(huì)阻礙市場(chǎng)效率,從而適得其反.
    因此,在環(huán)境權(quán)私法化尚無(wú)法成型的情況下,處于公法下的環(huán)境權(quán),應(yīng)當(dāng)怎樣去彌補(bǔ)自身缺陷,成為了學(xué)界廣泛討論的問(wèn)題.在現(xiàn)有基礎(chǔ)下,公益訴訟和行政管理固然是兩種相對(duì)較為適宜的方式,但其自身仍然存在一定的不足,如在訴訟法中,公益訴訟主體處境尷尬,因?yàn)槊袷略V訟的起訴人資格首先必須是“與案情有直接利害關(guān)系”,而公益訴訟往往起訴方是為公共利益進(jìn)行訴訟.此外,在許多無(wú)明文規(guī)定的條件下,案件的審判標(biāo)準(zhǔn)難以統(tǒng)一,法院經(jīng)常會(huì)以此由判定起訴方敗訴,如南京違規(guī)搭建紫金山觀景臺(tái)案.而行政管理也存在一定的漏洞,如蟲(chóng)草挖掘,只需繳納一定費(fèi)用,就可持續(xù)挖掘,其破壞環(huán)境的本質(zhì)并沒(méi)有變.在此基礎(chǔ)上,筆者認(rèn)為,進(jìn)一步的建立健全兩項(xiàng)制度,使其正常運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)并發(fā)揮作用,而不是尋求將環(huán)境權(quán)私法化,是較為妥當(dāng)?shù)?在此前提下,引入功利主義的價(jià)值衡量原則,對(duì)于解決沖突,有著很重要的借鑒價(jià)值.
    希望專(zhuān)業(yè)人士幫忙翻譯成英語(yǔ),特別是其中的專(zhuān)業(yè)性名詞,3Q
    其他人氣:913 ℃時(shí)間:2020-01-25 08:11:24
    優(yōu)質(zhì)解答
    Environmental rights or should remain in the public law perspective up gradually improved and establishment of environmental rights is to establish and maintain environmental law, and environmental law is their responsibility to protect the environment, based on the environmental protection of the public interest as an important objective, therefore, having the nature of social rights. At the same time, attempts to replace the so-called environmental rights to the existing civil law, property rights and personality rights, not only led to the civil rights set repetition, confusion, is not conducive to really establish environmental rights. Therefore, the environment is only right to damages based on tort to a constant only. In the study of the current international situation, development trend of environmental rights, environmental law in the European countries in general can be found on the personal property rights is strictly prohibited terms, there are countless about permits, licenses, quotas, time and space restrictions, environmental assessment and other aspects of legal provisions. These restrictions and prohibitions set terms, that by limiting the rights of personal property rights to achieve the shared goal of enhancing the environment. The effect of these restrictive provisions, its main goal is to restrict individual private rights through but will maximize social welfare, protection of private rights are not even out of the private rights of the environment right intentions, and some scholars have even proposed "Environmental Utopia" that is, in the law of humanity, given in addition to other species other than humans to equal legal status and the same effective protection of the right to practice their environment, in this case, but also the simple right to private rights of the environment do? Therefore, the current environment is not yet mature private law rights in the face of many practical problems Shihai can not solve disputes. Further to the above discussion, the environment is largely private law right to want to establish a preventive mechanism to compensate for the past, "Tort Liability Act" set forth in the environmental tort only after the damage occurred only remedy defects, while I hope by means of environmental rights will be placed side by side with property rights and other private rights or similar position, in order to protect them from the positive legislation. However, if placed in the right environment, like property with private property rights, in order to help market forces to self-regulation interests, to achieve the purpose of maximizing utility, in fact, is not feasible. Though the market is efficient, but also the emergence of regular "market failure", environmental resources as a public good (public goods), does not have the exclusive consumption, and the cost of such consumption is usually low or unpaid . This characteristic of environmental resources will cause demand and supply through the market mechanism can not automatically adapt to each other's problems, and environmental problems per se are "externalities", without administrative intervention in the case it will hinder market efficiency and thus counterproductive. Therefore, the right to private law in the environment could not be molded case, in the right environment under public law, it should be how to make up for their shortcomings, has become a widely discussed academic issues. The existing foundation, public interest litigation and administrative course of two relatively appropriate way, but there are still some of its own shortcomings, such as procedural law, public interest litigation body awkward, because civil prosecution qualification first must be "with a direct interest in the case," and public interest litigation is often the prosecution is in the public interest litigation. Moreover, in many no specific conditions, is difficult to unify criteria of trials, the courts often order by the judgment against the prosecution, such as the Purple Mountain Observatory in Nanjing to build the case of non-compliance. The administration also there are some loopholes, such as digging caterpillar fungus, simply pay a fee, on sustainable mining, the nature of its damage to the environment has not changed. On this basis, I believe that further establish and improve the two systems so that normal operation and play a role, rather than seeking the environmental rights of private law is more appropriate. In this context, the introduction of utilitarian value measurement principles for conflict resolution, has a very important reference value.
    我來(lái)回答
    類(lèi)似推薦
    請(qǐng)使用1024x768 IE6.0或更高版本瀏覽器瀏覽本站點(diǎn),以保證最佳閱讀效果。本頁(yè)提供作業(yè)小助手,一起搜作業(yè)以及作業(yè)好幫手最新版!
    版權(quán)所有 CopyRight © 2012-2024 作業(yè)小助手 All Rights Reserved. 手機(jī)版