The issues related to the negative impact on the environment with the permitted use of natural resources, when the user of natural resources has a permit for nature use and a construction project that has passed the procedure for agreeing on the state environmental review, are being investigated. The purpose of the paper is to establish the possibility of qualifying the actions of a nature user within the framework of his permitted activities as lawful infliction of harm to the natural environment. The injustice and unacceptability of the approaches formed in law enforcement practice on imposing responsibility on any user of nature for harm caused to the environment in the process of carrying out permitted economic activities is revealed. In the comparative legal aspect, the inquisitorial nature of approaches in domestic law enforcement is substantiated, which contradicts modern legal guarantees for ensuring the functioning of business, which are characteristic of foreign legal orders. There is an unfair distribution of the burden of proof and the establishment of de facto legal presumptions not provided for by law in relations from environmental torts. In order to establish the fair liability of the tortfeasor, when considering cases of environmental torts, it is necessary to take into account the fact that state regulatory authorities have issued a permit for subsoil use, because such an act authorizes the use of natural resources and, accordingly, allows for environmental degradation. In the article, the author formulates the criteria for lawful infliction of harm and factors that should affect the amount of liability of the nature user in connection with causing harm to the environment.