The Generalization Of The Responsibility Of Soil Pollution Remediation

In recent years,after decades of economic development,the accumulation of soil pollution problems continue to erupt,who will bear the responsibility of soil remediation behind these booms.Create a great sensation "Changzhou poison case verdicts,the environmental public interest organization losing and bear all legal costs,repair costs borne by the local government,three polluting chemical plant has not been any judgment of responsibility or even apologize for compensation.However,in May31,2016,the soil pollution control law,the promulgation of the notice,the twenty-first clearly stipulates that the determination of the main body in accordance with the "who pollution,who governance" polluter burden principle.For a time,who is to pay for the repair of the problem becomes the focus of hot debate.In China's "civil law","contract law" "company law" in the provisions of the company after the merger of the rights and obligations of the general following that,whether in the repair of responsibility on soil pollution is also applicable to the general following,this paper intends to discuss the two aspects of corporate responsibility for remediation of contaminated soil.First,there is pollution behavior of soil companies after separation after the merger of new subject is the general following soil pollution remediation responsibility.Two summary of the soil pollution remediation by the hands of the front of the responsibility to touch the legal retroactivity.Japan has a wealth of experience and perfect the law in soil pollution control,there are many similarities with our theory,such as the "polluter pays principle" is also determined in Japanese law followed by soil remediation liability principle,but Japan has with its development into a multi meaning "the principle of the burden".First introduced the "Changzhou drug cases" after and caused the problem,followed by the introduction of Japanese legal rules about soil pollution remediation responsibility principle,including: "the principle of the burden" and "beneficiary pay responsibility" and "common responsibility" and "extended producer responsibility".Then the paper introduces the "PCB case of soil pollution removal from the former site of the chemical plant" in Changzhou,which is similar to that in China,and the opinion of the Supreme Court of Tokyo in Japan for the similar cases.Then the relevant provisions of China's environmental pollution liability,to explore the "who pollution,who governance" principle should have the meaning.