Abstract: Based on the four major public nuisance suits in the 1960s,Japan has developed a causationpresumption rule different from traditional tort litigation in legal theory and judicialpractice,including presumptions of probability,indirect evidence,and epidemiology etc.Since the 1990s,for fulfilling the policy of protecting victims in environmental tort,the special rule of the burden of proof on causation were applied in China.However,there are disputes onthose specialrules in both theoretical research and judicial practice,focusing on whetherthevictimhasacertainburden to prove the causation.Comparatively speaking,Japan's causation proof rules ismorecautious,it can realize the policy objective of protectingvictimsunderthepremiseofscientificproof.InChina,the causation proof rules emphasized moreonthepolicyobjectives through the special burdenofproof,but ignored thefinding of truth.Consideringthecurrentenvironmentalconditions,China should insist on theexistingrulesontheburdenofcausation proof,and apply causation presumption at the same time tobalancethe policyconsiderationsandlegallogic.

Key words: environmentalhealthdamage, causation proof, methodofproof, burdenofproof