?
Проблемные вопросы возмещения экологического вреда: замечания на полях Обзора судебной практики Верховного Суда РФ
Author analyzes some positions of the Review of judicial practice on the application of environmental legislation, approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on June 24, 2022. This review is the first review of the practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, dedicated exclusively to environmental issues, and prepared as a result of the seminar of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the practice of courts in the field of environmental protection. The review of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, as an act of generalization of judicial practice in order to ensure uniformity, is of great importance for the formation of court approaches to resolving environmental disputes, and therefore is of particular interest to study by both practitioners and researchers. The author notes the presence of disputable positions in the review under consideration, and also highlights the various facets of the positions cited by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the problems of their practical implementation. Among such problems, there is a lack of unity in understanding the harm to the environment, the absence of many environmental quality standards as an obstacle to fair compensation for damage to nature, compensation for environmental damage for lawful activities on general terms with illegal users of natural resources, an extremely high standard of proof in cases of environmental compensation for users of natural resources, the difficulty of holding state bodies accountable, and others. The author also highlights the trends in legal regulation and law enforcement practice in the field of nature management and environmental protection, outlined by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (“pro-state” bias in resolving disputes about compensation for environmental damage, strengthening the priority of monetary compensation over in-kind compensation for harm and the fiscal function of compensation for environmental harm etc.).