Except it was American courts in the early 19th century which deviated from the Anglo-Saxon common law tradition of property rights which viewed air pollution was a tort.

Soviet rivers were some of the most polluted in the world.

A free-market has much stricter limits on pollution than any crony government agency.

What are these limits if not government regulations? Are you aware of any country that doesn't have regulations to prevent pollution of rivers or air in which free-market prevents such pollution all by itself?

I'm not aware of any countries where there exists a "pure" free market. While there is plenty written on the theory of enforcing laws and property rights sans government, I think it a stretch even with a government run court system, to refer to a court's ruling in behalf of property rights as "central planning". Even calling such a ruling "government regulation" seems pretty far from what most would consider "regulation".

> I'm not aware of any countries where there exists a "pure" free market.

Unicorns are also pretty awesome - unfortunately, they seem to suffer from the fatal defect of there not being even a single instance of such a thing in consensual reality.

By definition everything was once a "unicorn" before the resources, demand and labor were mixed into developing it. Everything must originate as a idea before it can become praxis. Modern capitalism itself was a unicorn as recently as the 18th century, but it emerged nevertheless.

>consensual reality

That sounds even move elusive than the unicorns

Good luck with the unicorns, then.

An absence of a particular primary legislation related to pollution does not imply that the economic order is therefore laissez-faire.

Government regulations are not torts.