Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://dspace.nlu.edu.ua//jspui/handle/123456789/16546Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Кошеленко, К.В. | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2019-08-18T07:21:26Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2019-08-18T07:21:26Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2019 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | Кошеленко К. В. Юридична відповідальність за шкоду навколишньому природному середовищу за законодавством України і ЄС: порівняльно-правовий аспект : автореф. дис. ... канд. юрид. наук : 12.00.06 / К. В. Кошеленко ; наук. кер. А. П. Гетьман ; Нац. юрид. ун-т ім. Ярослава Мудрого. – Харків, 2019. – 22 с. | ru_RU |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://dspace.nlu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/16546 | - |
| dc.description | The thesis for obtaining the scientific degree of Candidate of Legal Sciences, specialty 12.00.06 «Land Law; Agrarian Law; Ecological Law; Natural Resources Law». – Yaroslav Mudriy National Law University, Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, Kharkiv, 2019. The dissertation provides a comprehensive comparative description of the institute of legal responsibility for damage to the natural environment in the legislation of Ukraine and the European Union. It was emphasized that the main regularity of the development of environmental law in Ukraine today is to expand its sphere of action, to elaborate many legal requirements, and to create new objects of environmental law. The intolerable process of its development of environmental law in the context of independent Ukraine indicates that the expansion of the field of legal regulation is an objective process, the problem of substantial updating and improvement of environmental legislation is becoming acute. Legal liability for damage to the environment is a key aspect of improving legal regulation in the field of environmental legal relations. The author substantiates the proposal to adopt the EU experience in determining the mechanism of legal response to cases of damage to the environment, based on which the requirement to develop a reasonable and proportional range of options for remedying the situation, including initial recovery and, if necessary, additional and compensatory restoration, evaluation of different options and selection of the most optimal based on the following criteria: the cost of implementation; degree of prevention of side effects; the benefits of each option; probability of success; time required for each of the options to recover damaged resources; degree of recovery; geographical connection with the damaged site if measures are taken elsewhere. At the same time, the previously established hierarchy of criteria for the choice of options is absent. It is proved that the responsibility for damage to the environment should be considered as an independent form of legal responsibility because of the special nature of relations between the state and the entities that violated the norms of environmental law. These relations arise on the basis of legal facts, namely, legal acts that violate the requirements of environmental law and cause (or threaten to cause) harm to the environment, resulting in the coercive imposed on the offender, the effectiveness of which is ensured by the possibility of using the state machinery. At the same time, the damage is an integral part of this type of offense. It is determined that the specific feature of legal responsibility for damage to the environment is its complex nature - as an institute of environmental law, it combines the principles and norms of not only ecological but administrative, civil, labor, criminal law. In this case, a special feature is the possession of property liability. The study reveals the functions of legal liability for damage to the environment. It is noted that in the mechanism of legal regulation this institute: 1) stimulates compliance with the principles and norms of environmental law; 2) warns of new violations in the field of environmental protection; 3) provide compensation for damage to the environment caused by illegal behavior; 4) creates a guarantee of the punishment of persons guilty of committing an unlawful act. The author proposes to take as a basis of legal regulation the approach by which harm to the environment includes the costs of restoring, replacing or acquiring the equivalent, reducing the cost of natural resources between the time damage and renewal of the resource, as well as the reimbursement of reasonable costs to assess the damage. For resources that have objective economic value, their lost value is determined by the size of the decline in market prices. For resources that are not marketable, the relevant indicators are calculated using alternative methods. The damage to be compensated is the cost of restoring the natural object to which it was inflicted to its base state ("initial recovery"), as well as the cost of "compensatory recovery", which includes the cost of recovery or increase of resources , required to compensate for the temporary costs of the respective services. It is substantiated that in the mechanism of determination of legal liability for harm caused to the environment the important step is the identification of the nature, degree, as well as the spatial and temporal scale of such damage, which should answer the following questions: was it possible for the operator to identify in advance the risk of negative impact on the environment from its activities? What habitats, types of natural resources are most at risk of harm? Are there any direct evidence of harm? What is the nature of potential harm (eg mortality, habitat loss, population decline, pollution, which limits the production potential of habitats)? How much potential damage is spatially distributed? How long can damage last? Is it possible that the damage will continue in the future? It is noted that after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the whole system of protection of basic human rights at the European level was strengthened by the provisions of Art. 6 of the Treaty, which made the Charter fundamental rights mandatory, including the rights protected by the ECHR, as well as constitutional traditions common to the Member States. The notion of "environment" is never mentioned in the text of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Moreover, its text does not present the concept of the right to a healthy environment. Similarly, the Convention does not determine whether a person has the right to a healthy environment. However, the ECtHR has developed a practice according to which "environmental pollution can negatively affect the private and family life of a person." | ru_RU |
| dc.description.abstract | Дисертація на здобуття наукового ступеня кандидата юридичних наук за спеціальністю 12.00.06 «Земельне право; аграрне право; екологічне право; природоресурсне право». – Національний юридичний університет імені Ярослава Мудрого, Міністерство освіти і науки України, Харків, 2019. У дисертації надано комплексну порівняльну характеристику інституту юридичної відповідальності за шкоду навколишньому природному середовищу в законодавстві України і Європейського Союзу. Запропоновано взяти за основу правового регулювання підхід, за яким шкода навколишньому природному середовищу включає витрати на відновлення, заміну або придбання еквіваленту, зменшення вартості природного ресурсу між часом завдання шкоди й поновленням ресурсу, а також відшкодування розумних витрат на оцінку завданої шкоди. Для ресурсів, які мають об’єктивну економічну цінність, втрачена їх вартість визначається у розмірі зниження ринкової ціни. Щодо ресурсів, використання яких не є ринковим, відповідні показники розраховуються з використанням альтернативних методів. Шкода, яка підлягає відшкодуванню, – це витрати на відновлення природного об’єкта, якому її було завдано, до його базового стану («первісне відновлення»), а також витрати на «компенсаційне відновлення», яке включає витрати на відновлення або на збільшення ресурсів, необхідних для компенсації тимчасових витрат на відповідні послуги. Особливу увагу приділено тому, що позитивним обов’язком держав є забезпечення ефективного механізму притягнення суб’єктів господарювання до відповідальності за порушення у сфері охорони навколишнього природного середовища, а також у випадках, коли суб’єкти господарювання не запроваджують механізми оцінки ризиків від своєї діяльності для навколишнього середовища, здоров’я населення, екологічного благополуччя певної громади тощо. | ru_RU |
| dc.language.iso | other | ru_RU |
| dc.subject | охорона навколишнього природного середовища | ru_RU |
| dc.subject | юридична відповідальність за шкоду навколишньому природному середовищу | ru_RU |
| dc.subject | принцип «забруднювач платить» | ru_RU |
| dc.subject | відповідальність за шкоду навколишньому природному середовищу за правом України | ru_RU |
| dc.subject | відповідальність за шкоду навколишньому природному середовищу за правом ЄС | ru_RU |
| dc.subject | environmental protection | ru_RU |
| dc.subject | legal liability for damage to the natural environment | ru_RU |
| dc.subject | principle of "polluter pays" | ru_RU |
| dc.subject | liability for damage to the environment under the law of Ukraine | ru_RU |
| dc.subject | responsibility for the damage to the environment under the EU law | ru_RU |
| dc.title | Юридична відповідальність за шкоду навколишньому природному середовищу за законодавством України і ЄС: порівняльно-правовий аспект | ru_RU |
| dc.title.alternative | Legal liability for damage to the natural environment under the legislation of Ukraine and the EU: the comparative legal aspect | ru_RU |
| dc.type | Book | ru_RU |
| Appears in Collections: | 12.00.06 – Земельне право; аграрне право; екологічне право; природоресурсне право | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Koshelenko_2019.pdf | 337.82 kB | Adobe PDF |  View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.