Earticle

현재 위치 Home

프랑스에서의 석면피해와 국가배상책임
Asbestos damage and State Compensation in France

첫 페이지 보기
  • 발행기관
    원광대학교 법학연구소 바로가기
  • 간행물
    원광법학 KCI 등재 바로가기
  • 통권
    제27집 제2호 (2011.06)바로가기
  • 페이지
    pp.31-52
  • 저자
    김성원
  • 언어
    한국어(KOR)
  • URL
    https://www.earticle.net/Article/A145655

원문정보

초록

영어
Asbestos was used in ancient times due to its resistance to fire.
Asbestos use remained moderate until the end of the nineteenth century, when the industrialisation of society meant that protection from fire and heat was necessary. However, Asbestos was known as a material that can lead to lung cancer and other diseases. For that reason, France and the United States, Japan and other industrialized nations, most take steps to prohibit asbestos was used.
This state of affairs is compounded by the significant lapse of time before asbestos-linked pathologies manifest themselves. It is therefore understandable that there is a regular increase in the number of known victims and in the lawsuits filed by victims seeking compensation.
In France, asbestos victims can obtain compensation in several different ways. It is a remedy through the FIVA(Indemnification fund for asbestos victims) and the Court. The FIVA aims to compensate the various types of harm suffered by asbestos victims(regardless of whether or not the exposure was occupational). FIVA which ensures full compensation for harm suffered by asbestos victims.
On the other hand, where the FIVA considers that the statutory conditions governing indemnification are not met, it notifies its refusal to the applicant by registered letter with return receipt requested, which contains the reason for the refusal. The FIVA must also inform the applicant of the timeframe(two months) and methods of filing an appeal.
An appeal is possible in three cases: if the indemnification request was rejected by the FIVA, if an offer was not made within 6 months, or if the FIVA offer was refused. Appeals are heard by the Court of Appeals that has jurisdiction over the applicant’'s place of residence. An appeal on points of law before the French Supreme Court is possible if the Court of Appeals does not find in favour of the victim. However, certain asbestos victims have not hesitated in seeking compensation in other ways and in calling the State’s liability in question before the administrative courts.
The French administrative courts have ruled on the State’s liability in asbestos cases on several occasions. Indeed, on 30 May 2000, the Marseille Administrative Court ruled against the State for not having legislated before the Decree of 17 August 1977 concerning specific safety measures applicable in establishments where the personnel is exposed to the effect of asbestos dust and for not having requested a scientific study on the subject before 1995, when the French National Health and Medical Research Institute published a study. The French Labour Code entitles the State to limit employers’ rights to determine working conditions in the field of health and safety.
These decisions were confirmed by the Marseille Administrative Court of Appeals on 18 October 2001. The supporting arguments submitted, namely the delayed reaction by other States and the difficulty at the time of carrying out a study aimed at specifying the exact nature of the risk, were not accepted. The French State was then criticised for merely having transposed the 1987 and 1992 European Directives into French law, without the resulting reduction in exposure thresholds being justified by precise scientific data.
The administrative magistrates held that the State could not claim to have acted responsibly by pleading compliance with European standards, which is necessary but not always sufficient. The State was held liable, both on the grounds of its shortcomings in the prevention of risks and on the grounds that its regulations were not sufficient and were not adopted early enough to deal with these same risks.
It is not surprising that the French State was held liable, given its delay in dealing with the issue of asbestos, compared to other European countries.
On 3 March 2004, the French Supreme Administrative Court upheld the ruling and confirmed the State’s liability.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말
 Ⅱ. 석면피해와 구제제도
 Ⅲ. 석면피해와 국가의 책임
  1. 국가의 책임을 인정한 사례
  2. 2004년 판결의 검토
  3. 2004년 판결의 평가
  4. 2004년 판결의 향후과제
 Ⅳ. 맺는말
 참고문헌
 

저자

  • 김성원 [ Kim, Sung-Won | 원광대학교 법학전문대학원 교수, 법학연구소 연구위원, 법학박사 ]

참고문헌

자료제공 : 네이버학술정보

간행물 정보

발행기관

  • 발행기관명
    원광대학교 법학연구소 [THE LAW RESEARCH INSTITUTE WONKWANG UNIVERSTIY]
  • 설립연도
    1961
  • 분야
    사회과학>법학
  • 소개
    법에 대한 이론적 · 실제적 연구를 수행하고 그 결과를 발표하여 한국과 지역사회의 법률문화의 발전에 기여함을 목적으로 설립되었으며 법학일반이론과 법학교육방법 등의 연구와 법률구조안내 및 상담을 한다

간행물

  • 간행물명
    원광법학 [Journal of Law research]
  • 간기
    계간
  • pISSN
    1598-429X
  • eISSN
    2508-4526
  • 수록기간
    1962~2026
  • 등재여부
    KCI 등재
  • 십진분류
    KDC 360 DDC 340

이 권호 내 다른 논문 / 원광법학 제27집 제2호

    피인용수 : 0(자료제공 : 네이버학술정보)

    함께 이용한 논문 이 논문을 다운로드한 분들이 이용한 다른 논문입니다.

      페이지 저장