Climate change litigation serves as an effective tool for global climate governance and a means to hold responsible parties accountable for their violations of international climate law obligations or domestic legal duties.The identification of climate tort facts represents the central focus and challenge in such litigation.The interplay between international and domestic laws,the pluralism of claim bases,the complexities surrounding climate science,and the determination of causality all pose difficulties in establishing factual evidence.Global practice reveals two modes of tort fact-finding in climate change litigation:abstract and concrete.These differ in terms of evidentiary examination by courts,claims made during litigation,burden of proof on parties involved,and logical reasoning applied to ascertain facts within public and private law frameworks.In essence,these two modes correspond respectively to proving'risk'and'damage'associated with climate infringement while meeting specific requirements for evidence substantiation and liability determination.Based on this understanding,improvements should be made in three aspects regarding tort fact-finding in climate change litigation:enhancing judges'rational comprehension system concerning climate change issues on the subject;refining normative frameworks and program designs related to fact-finding processes in terms of objects;reconstructing systems for reviewing evidence as well as assigning responsibility for providing proof in behavior.
climate change litigationfact-findinghuman rightsenvironmental public interest litigationclimate tort
NETL
NSTL
万方数据
