摘要
欧洲法院和美国法院在审理针对政府及非政府实体的气候变化责任案件时,往往存在不同的立场和观点,本文就此进行评析。评析的重点包括:哪些诉请可被受理,针对这些诉请,法院又会判决采取何种救济方式。在审理案件时,权力制衡原则、诉讼资格问题及政治问题原则,对于法院的权能和可以判令采取的救济方式都会产生一定影响。与美国法院相比,欧洲法院更愿意受理气候变化诉讼案件,其判决当中的权利救济方式也更具前瞻性。
This paper explores the different approaches used by the courts in the EU and the USA concerning the adjudication of climate liability in cases against governmental and nongovernmental entities.The framework for this analysis focuses on what claims are justiciable and what remedies are available.The doctrines of separation of powers,standing,and political question all come into play along with practical issues of the ability of courts to manage and enforce whatever remedies are ordered.It is concluded that the courts in the EU appear to provide more promising fora for climate activists to pursue aggressive judicial remedies than those in the USA.
出处
《湖湘法学评论》
2024年第3期147-160,共14页
Huxiang Law Revie
基金
教育部人文社会科学青年基金项目:法律学说司法运用的实证考察与路径优化研究(23YJC820053)
教育部哲学社会科学研究重大课题攻关项目:全球治理的区域转向与中国参与亚洲区域组织实践研究(22JZD040)。
关键词
气候变化
气候诉讼
司法救济
climate changes
climate litigation
judicial remedies
