ODGOVORNOST ZA ŠKODO, KI JO POVZROČI DOMAČA ŽIVAL S PREGLEDOM SODNE PRAKSE

Kaštrun, Eva

| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font

First page > Show document

Show document

Title:	ODGOVORNOST ZA ŠKODO, KI JO POVZROČI DOMAČA ŽIVAL S PREGLEDOM SODNE PRAKSE
Authors:	ID Kaštrun, Eva (Author) ID Vrenčur, Renato (Mentor) More about this mentor...
Files:	UN_Kastrun_Eva_2016.pdf (780,03 KB) MD5: DF4AE52D3CCB4CDA1B1F61C7BA7FD022
Language:	Slovenian
Work type:	Bachelor thesis/paper
Typology:	2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization:	PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:	Žival je v pravu stvar, zato ima na njej lahko fizična ali pravna oseba lastninsko pravico. To pa ne pomeni, da se žival lahko kar enači s predmetom, saj so živali vendarle posebej zaščiten objekt prava. Predvsem je pomembno razlikovati nenevarne živali od nevarnih, saj je za škodo, ki jo povzročijo nevarne živali predpisana strožja odgovornost od tiste, ki jo povzročijo nenevarne. Za presojo, ali je žival nevarna, so pomembne njene lastnosti. Za to presojo pa ni pomembno ali je žival divja, domača ali udomačena. Za škodo, ki jo povzroči domača žival drugemu, je odgovoren njen imetnik, oziroma tisti, kateremu je lastnik žival zaupal. Za imetnika kot osebo, ki je zavezana za povračilo škode, katero povzroči domača žival, gre šteti bodisi lastnika, drugega stvarno-pravnega upravičenca ali obligacijsko-pravnega upravičenca. Riziko naj torej poleg lastnika domače živali nosi tisti, ki žival dejansko ima. V nekaterih primerih pa se kot imetnika živali lahko obravnava tudi več oseb hkrati. Odškodninska obveznost je obveznost stranke, da poravna škodo, za katero je odgovorna. Odgovornost za škodo, ki jo povzroči žival spada med posebne vrste oziroma oblike neposlovnih odškodninskih obveznosti. Katera pravila o odgovornosti imetnika živali se bodo v konkretnem primeru uporabila, je odvisno od lastnosti živali. Kolikor gre za nevarno domačo žival, je odgovornost imetnika objektivna. Tu prihajajo v poštev vse tiste določbe, ki se nanašajo na odgovornost za škodo od nevarne stvari. Kadar je domača žival tako nevarna, da ustreza pravnemu standardu nevarne živali, se imetnik svoje odgovornosti ne more rešiti s še tolikšno skrbnostjo. V vsakdanjem življenju se vprašanje odškodninske odgovornosti imetnika živali pogosteje pojavlja pri ugrizih psov, kjer velja enaka logika. Če je pes po naravi popadljiv ali je v takem stanju, da je jasno, da je bolj nevaren, potem se ga lahko obravnava kot nevarno žival in je torej odgovornost imetnika večja.
Keywords:	domača žival, nenevarna žival, nevarna žival, imetnik, odškodninska odgovornost, subjektivna odgovornost, objektivna odgovornost, skrbnost, varstvo, nadzor
Place of publishing:	Maribor
Publisher:	[E. Kaštrun]
Year of publishing:	2016
PID:	20.500.12556/DKUM-63878
UDC:	368(043.2)
COBISS.SI-ID:	5347883
NUK URN:	URN:SI:UM:DK:LXIWEUBV
Publication date in DKUM:	02.12.2016
Views:	2505
Downloads:	313
Metadata:
Categories:	PF
:	Copy citation

Average score:	(0 votes)
Your score:	Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:

Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:	English
Title:	LIABILITY FOR DAMAGE CAUSED BY A DOMESTIC ANIMAL WITH AN OVERVIEW OF CASE LAW
Abstract:	Legally speaking, animals are considered to be “things” meaning either a business or an individual can own them. However, that does not mean that an animal can be equated with an inanimate object and they do enjoy certain rights and protections under the law. Firstly, it is important to differentiate between dangerous and non-dangerous animals as any harm caused by the former carries a heavier penalty than for the latter and different legal principles apply. Determining whether an animal is dangerous depends on certain characteristics, but not on whether the animal is considered to be a pet, livestock or wild. For any harm caused by a pet, the owner or any individual entrusted by the owner to take care of the animal, is held responsible. In other words, the individual that was caring for the animal at the time of the damage being caused will be held responsible in conjunction with the legal owner of the animal. Responsibility for the damages caused by an animal is a specific kind of non-commercial damage. The specific rules that will be used to assess the amount of damages due depends on the characteristics of the animal in question: - for damage caused by an objectively dangerous animal, the owner’s liability is strict (first paragraph, article 158 of the Obligations Code), - for damage caused by a non-dangerous pet, the owner shall be held responsible unless he can prove that the necessary care and supervision was exercised (second paragraph, article 158 of the Obligations Code). For the owner of a non-dangerous animal to be held responsible, a claimant needs to show: wrongdoing on the part of the owner or keeper of the animal, some kind of injury or damage suffered and a causal link between the two. If these three elements are satisfied, the legal liability of the owner / holder is assumed. In certain cases, an owner of a non-dangerous pet can discharge his liability for the damage caused if he can show that sufficient care and supervision of the animal was exercised. However, in cases involving objectively assessed dangerous animals, the owner’s liability is strict and therefore no amount of due care can prevent damages from accruing. In everyday life, the most common situation involving animals causing injuries, relates to dog bites. Under the law dogs can be considered either dangerous or non-dangerous depending on the animal’s nature and demeanour.
Keywords:	domestic animal, non-dangerous animal, dangerous animal, owner, responsibility for the damages, strict liability, necessary care, supervision.

Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)

0 - 0 / 0

There are no comments!

Back