The Scope of Compensation for Marine Ecological Damage from the Perspective of the Civil Code of the PRC

Abstract Article 1235 of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China incorporates the principle of full compensation and defines the scope of compensation for ecological damage. Nevertheless, it fails to clarify the wide range of ecological damage resulting from various tort violations. In addition, it fails to acknowledge the categorization of ecological damage into two distinct types: ‘civil private damage’ and ‘pure public interest damage’. Moreover, disregarding the distinctions between the two categories of damages has legal ramifications that broaden the range of public interest influenced by private law. In terms of the framework of the national legal system, the ecological damage compensation regime encompasses both public law remedies and private law remedies. The traditional ‘either public or private’ analysis methodology has difficulties in providing a satisfactory explanation. When determining the scope of compensation for marine ecological damage, it is important to take into account both the fundamental principles of the legal system and the nature-based characteristics of marine ecological damage. In summary, the scope of marine ecological damage in the private legal system should include the cost of preventive measures, the cost of restoration and rehabilitation of marine ecology, the loss during the restoration period, and the investigation and assessment fees. However, it should not include loss in respect of pure public interest damage arising from permanent damage caused to the natural ecosystem.