تأثیر مشارکت زیان‌دیده در خسارت بر مسئولیت بین‌المللی دولت در قبال خسارت‌های زیست‌محیطی
محورهای موضوعی : حقوق محیط زیست
سیدقاسم زمانی
1
(
استاد دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران.
)
وحید بَذّار
2
(
دکتری حقوق بین‌الملل دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران (مسئول مکاتبات)
)
کلید واژه: تعهد به کاهش خسارت, مسوولیت بین المللی, فرض وجود خطر, حقوق بین الملل محیط زیست, مشارکت در خسارت,
چکیده مقاله :
بر اساس حقوق مسئولیت بین‌المللی، مشارکت زیان‌دیده در خسارت سبب کاهش میزان غرامت خواهد شد. حقوق بین‌الملل محیط‌زیست علاوه بر پذیرش مشارکت زیان‌دیده به‌عنوان مبنایی برای کاهش میزان غرامت، آن را به‌عنوان یکی از عوامل رافع جبران خسارت در قبال مسئولیت ناشی از خسارت زیست‌محیطی قلمداد نموده است. تقصیر زیان‌دیده در تعیین کلیۀ خسارت‌های زیست‌محیطی ازجمله هزینه‌های مربوط به تدابیر پیشگیرانه نیز تأثیرگذار است. همچنین، پس از ایجاد خسارت نیز زیان‌دیده باید در جهت کاهش میزان آن تلاش کند و در صورت توانایی در کاهش خسارت و امتناع از آن، مشارکت در خسارت بر مسئولیت تأثیرگذار است. همچنین در وضعیت‌هایی که زیان‌دیده علی‌رغم فرض وجود خطر اقدام می کند نیز قاعدۀ مزبور لازم‌الرعایه است. این مقاله تلاش دارد تا ضمن بررسی شرایط مشارکت زیان‌دیده در خسارت در خصوص خسارت‌های زیست‌محیطی، مسائل مرتبط با این قاعده در حقوق بین‌الملل محیط‌زیست را مورد مداقه و بررسی قرار دهد.
According to international responsibility law, the injured person's contribution to the injury will reduce the amount of reparation. International environmental law considered the injured person's contribution as one of the precluding of reparation for environmental liability, in addition to it considered as a basis for reducing the amount of reparation. The injured person's fault affects the determination of all environmental damages, including the cost of preventive measures. After the damage has been incurred also the injured person should try to reduce the amount of damage and if it is able to prevent and refuse to do so, contribution to the damage will be effective on Responsibility. When the injured person acts in spite of the assumption of risk, this principle can be applied. In addition to considering the injured person's contribution to the injury and conditions of implementation of that for environmental damages, this article tries to investigate the related issues of this principle in international environmental law.
1. Twomey, David P., Marianne M. Jennings, Philippe. 2011. Business Law: Principles for Today's Commercial Environment (Cengage Learning), pp. 181-182.
2. Barboza, Julio. 2011. The Environment, Risk and Liability in International Law (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers), pp. 3,54,53.
3. Faure, Michael G., Grimeaud, David. 2000. Financial Assurance Issues on Environmental Liability, Final version Report of Maastricht University and European Centre for Tort and Insurance Law (ECTIL), p. 13.
4. Verheyen, Roda. 2007. Climate Change Damage and International Law: Prevention Duties and State Responsibility (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers), pp. 248,136.
5. Bergkamp, Lucas. 2001. Liability and Environment: Private and Public Law Aspects of Civil Liability for Environment Harm in an International Context (Kluwer Law International Publication), p. 280,278-279.
6. Hinteregger, Monika. 2008. Systems of Environmental Liability in Europe, Environmental Liability and Ecological Damage in European Law-edited by Monika Hinteregger (Cambridge University Press), pp. 3-32.
7. Louka, Elli. 2006. International Environmental Law: Fairness, Effectiveness, and World Order (Cambridge University Press), p. 467.
8. Posch, Willibald. 2008. Some observations on the law applicable to transfrontier environmental damage, Environmental Liability and Ecological Damage in European Law-edited by Monika Hinteregger (Cambridge University Press), p. 166.
9. Bazzar, Vahid. 2017. Content Analysis of Judgment of the International Court of Justice in Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Case, Culmination of Law, No. 18, pp. 209-210. (in Persian)
10. Szabo, Marcel. 2009. The Implementation of the Judgment of the ICJ in the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Dispute, Environmental Policy and Law, Vol. 39, p. 15.
11. Rose, Jerome G. 2013. Legal Foundations of Environmental Planning: Textbook-casebook and Materials on Environmental Law (Transaction Publishers), p. 156.
12. Jennings, Marianne Moody. 2015. Business: Its Legal, Ethical, and Global Environment (Cengage Learning), p. 319.
13. Mustapher, Ntale. 2008. Rethinking the Application of the Principle of ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities’ in the International Climate Legal Framework (The International Climate Legal Framework), p. 3.
14. Sands, Philippe. 2003. Principles of International Environmental Law (Cambridge University Press), p. 286.
15. Morosini, Fabio. 2010. Trade and Climate Change Unveiling the Principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities from the WTO Agreements, The George Washington International Law Review, Vol. 42, pp. 717-719.
16. Wolf, Susan and Stanley, Neil. 2003. Wolf and Stanley on Environmental Law (Cavendish Publishing), p. 416.
17. Horton, Joshua B., Parker, Andrew, Keith, David. 2015. Liability for Solar Geoengineering Historical Precedents, contemporary Innovations, and Governance Possibilities (N.Y.U. Environmental Law Journal), Vol. 22, p. 236.
_||_
1. Twomey, David P., Marianne M. Jennings, Philippe. 2011. Business Law: Principles for Today's Commercial Environment (Cengage Learning), pp. 181-182.
2. Barboza, Julio. 2011. The Environment, Risk and Liability in International Law (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers), pp. 3,54,53.
3. Faure, Michael G., Grimeaud, David. 2000. Financial Assurance Issues on Environmental Liability, Final version Report of Maastricht University and European Centre for Tort and Insurance Law (ECTIL), p. 13.
4. Verheyen, Roda. 2007. Climate Change Damage and International Law: Prevention Duties and State Responsibility (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers), pp. 248,136.
5. Bergkamp, Lucas. 2001. Liability and Environment: Private and Public Law Aspects of Civil Liability for Environment Harm in an International Context (Kluwer Law International Publication), p. 280,278-279.
6. Hinteregger, Monika. 2008. Systems of Environmental Liability in Europe, Environmental Liability and Ecological Damage in European Law-edited by Monika Hinteregger (Cambridge University Press), pp. 3-32.
7. Louka, Elli. 2006. International Environmental Law: Fairness, Effectiveness, and World Order (Cambridge University Press), p. 467.
8. Posch, Willibald. 2008. Some observations on the law applicable to transfrontier environmental damage, Environmental Liability and Ecological Damage in European Law-edited by Monika Hinteregger (Cambridge University Press), p. 166.
9. Bazzar, Vahid. 2017. Content Analysis of Judgment of the International Court of Justice in Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Case, Culmination of Law, No. 18, pp. 209-210. (in Persian)
10. Szabo, Marcel. 2009. The Implementation of the Judgment of the ICJ in the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Dispute, Environmental Policy and Law, Vol. 39, p. 15.
11. Rose, Jerome G. 2013. Legal Foundations of Environmental Planning: Textbook-casebook and Materials on Environmental Law (Transaction Publishers), p. 156.
12. Jennings, Marianne Moody. 2015. Business: Its Legal, Ethical, and Global Environment (Cengage Learning), p. 319.
13. Mustapher, Ntale. 2008. Rethinking the Application of the Principle of ‘Common but Differentiated Responsibilities’ in the International Climate Legal Framework (The International Climate Legal Framework), p. 3.
14. Sands, Philippe. 2003. Principles of International Environmental Law (Cambridge University Press), p. 286.
15. Morosini, Fabio. 2010. Trade and Climate Change Unveiling the Principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities from the WTO Agreements, The George Washington International Law Review, Vol. 42, pp. 717-719.
16. Wolf, Susan and Stanley, Neil. 2003. Wolf and Stanley on Environmental Law (Cavendish Publishing), p. 416.
17. Horton, Joshua B., Parker, Andrew, Keith, David. 2015. Liability for Solar Geoengineering Historical Precedents, contemporary Innovations, and Governance Possibilities (N.Y.U. Environmental Law Journal), Vol. 22, p. 236.
