Keresés
Keresési eredmények
-
Ítélkezési állandók és vitás kérdések az erkölcsi kártérítés újabb magyar joggyakorlatában
Megtekintések száma:55Since 1992, date of Constitutional Court’s decision No. 34/1992, certain rules cannot be found in Hungarian Civil Code. There is only a part of a sentence that gives right to any injured person to claim damages in case of personal injuries. More than 10 years after the cassation we are able to look through the legal practice in connection with damages for non-pecuniary loss. The recent re-codifying process plans a brand new institution to substitute and follow damages for non pecuniary loss: pain award. To establish a decent regulation of pain award, jurisdiction of the last decade cannot be neglected. This essay aims to gather typical and crystallized methods of judgements in certain cases, which could be seen as essential and accepted unwritten rules of jurisdiction concerning this field of damages.
One of the most difficult problems to solve is the question of amount. This field of damages for non-pecuniary loss is always problematic, because all of the cases are different. Although there are similarities between cases if we examine just damages themselves, but due to the difference of human personality it is almost impossible to give exact phrases and rules to help our judges. We can say that highest amounts are generated by assaults against physical integrity and life. Examination during a legal procedure concentrates on the stress caused by the injury, number of injured rights, age of the injured person and the durability of the harm. If the injured person contributed to the injury, it generates reduced amount of damages.
Method of compensation is really simple for the first time. Hungarian legal system knows two different types for the method of damages: in kind or in money. Former one is inapplicable for non-pecuniary losses. If we compensate in money, there are two solutions: injured person can get the whole sum immediately or we can choose allowance as well. The adaptation of allowance is rather small in Hungary, in spite of the advantages this legal institution could offer. It does not mean res iudicata, so it is flexible and offers opportunity to adjust to changed circumstances in the future: both duration and amount of allowance could be changed.
It is an interesting question whether personal circumstances of the misdoer could be examined when calculating the amount of allowance. The answer is not unambiguous. Civil law focuses on compensation for the injured party, not the punishment of the misdoer. In spite of this essential lemma, it is necessary to take into account the solvency of the defendant, if we want the plaintiff to get the adjudged amount really.
Youth is not the only reason of allowance, sometimes old age could be a well-based legal ground for application of this method of compensation as well. It is really important to examine the personal circumstances of the injured party to choose between these two methods: which one serves the aim of compensation, moderation of lost joy of life the most.
Civil Code precludes the possibility to apply both methods together for the same plaintiff. In my opinion the solution of German Civil Code (BGB) should be considered. BGB allows both methods together. It means that possibilities could be wider and fit better to the actual case and its circumstances.
Although obligation of damages has two parties traditionally, in a legal procedure of damages for non-pecuniary loss this bipolar situation can be proven false. On the part of the misdoer it is an interesting question what kind of damages can be blamed the state. In Hungary we can meet rules order the responsibility of the state in the field of medical damages or damages for unlawful arrest and illegal imprisonment. Amounts of damages are the highest in these situations.
On the part of the injured person an often argued problem the position of secondary victims’ claims. These claims are always problematic, because personality rights belong closely to the person himself and there is no possibility to inherit them. Hungarian Civil Code admits compensation for relatives only in case of injuring reputation of a dead person. There are several decisions in which courts admit these claims on the ground of their sui generis base. It is a decent solution, but because of the uneven jurisdiction it needs codifying.
We can say that there are a lot of jurisdictional constants in Hungary in connection with damages for non-pecuniary loss. These are easy to collect and most of them are able to be codified in a strictly non-taxative style. But this examination showed that doubtful questions can also be found in Hungary especially the application of allowance, claims of secondary victims. To arrange these problems, starting point should be jurisdiction itself.
-
Gondolatok az erkölcsi károkhoz kapcsolódó hozzátartozói igények megengedhetőségéről
Megtekintések száma:48On the very swampy field of damages for non-pecuniary loss there is a special problem called claims of relatives. These claims are also known as claims of secondary victims or third parties. In this legal situation the injury itself hurts not the claimer himself. The claimer has non-pecuniary or moral loss because of his connection with the injured person. He is not the direct and suffering subject but the one who has a loss in his personal rights.
In Hungary the question is whether these claims can be permitted or not. During the changing structure of damages for non-pecuniary loss in the second half of the 20th century, this problem fitted to the actual judgement of moral damages. Now days the question is a little bit easier: in almost every decision courts admit the right of relatives to claim damages for an injury against there beloved relative, but in most of the cases they demand that plaintiffs has to demonstrate manifested losses not only the infringement of their personality rights.
In this essay beside the Hungarian jurisdiction I examine German, French, English, Belgian and Dutch legal points of view too. The most interesting and – in my opinion – the one that can be useful for the upcoming new Hungarian Civil Code is the Dutch system.
Dutch Civil Code limits the possibility of ‘third parties’ to claim damages for non-pecuniary loss as a result of the injury or death of another person. In typical cases the plaintiff would like to claim compensation because he suffered mental illness from witnessing the death of another person, namely a relative. This claim is not awarded by Dutch courts because of the prohibition of Civil Code, but the interpretation of the mentioned provision lives restrictively in jurisdiction. We can find two situations when the claim of third parties can be awarded. First of all, the claimant can only claim for damages, caused by a mental trauma because of being witness of an injury against another person, if he can establish that the aggressor (defendant) also committed an unlawful act vis-à-vis the claimant himself, which resulted in the trauma. It is really difficult to be demonstrated because of the causation required by BW. The process to verify that the aggressor, who committed an unlawful act against another person, causes the trauma is almost impossible in some cases. The second chance of the secondary victim to claim for compensation is if he verifies that the trauma amounts to physical or non-physical injury. If this is the case, the claimant can get compensation of his pecuniary loss (such as cost of medical treatment) and non-pecuniary loss on the basis of his non-physical personal injury.
A famous case in Dutch case law is ‘Taxi bus case’. A 5-year old little girl was riding her bike close to her home, when a taxi bus overruns her. The bus actually rides over the girl’s head. The mother was immediately warned by one of the neighbours and found her daughter with her face turned to the ground. First, the mother called the ambulance hoping that the girl was still alive. When the mother tried to turn her daughter’s head to look her in the face, she experienced that her hand disappeared into the skull of the girl. The mother noticed that the substance next to her girl’s head was not, as she considered, her vomit, but appeared to be the girl’s brain itself. The mother suffered severe mental illness because of the shock of this sight and the realization. Dutch law is consequent in the question that there is no claim for non-pecuniary damages subsequent to death of a relative. Taxi bus case was the first when Dutch Supreme Court awarded the right to compensation of non-pecuniary damages to somebody who lost his relative. The decision contained that the act committed towards the child, must also be regarded as tortuous towards the mother. The Court emphasized that there was a distinction between the consequences of the child’s death, for which no non-pecuniary damages may be awarded, and the consequences of the confrontation with the accident, for which damages may indeed be awarded. The mother received 14,000 Euros for non-pecuniary damages. This case shows that although in principle the plaintiff has a right to claim compensation for the exact damages he suffered, the courts are free to assess the damage in a more abstract way, if that corresponds better to its nature.
Examining this case it is obvious that extra conditions are demanded to claim for non-pecuniary damages because of the loss of a relative. Only the fact of losing a close relative is not enough for a successful action. There have to be special circumstances, which demonstrate that the unlawful act made a direct effect to the plaintiff, who became the primary victim.
The English solution is interesting because not only the relatives have right to claim but almost anybody who can verify a close relationship with the injured person. In my opinion this system ensures a more coherent and logical jurisdiction, because during the examination of authorization not only a legal fact – being a relative of the injured person – establishes the right to claim but a real emotional relationship.
-
Előreláthatósági klauzula a szerződések jogában
Megtekintések száma:58The essay is about the clause of foreseeability in connection with damages for breach of a contract. This seems to be a constant problem throughout the history of law how and when it is reasonably to limit the amount of damages in case of breach.
The general principle of full compensation originates in the main purpose of private law, restoring the violated financial situation. At the same time in business relations it often happens that damages occurred as consequences of breach highly exceed the contractual interest of the party and generate indirect damages independent from the violator’s influence. This is considered to be the starting point of the dilemma about restricting the damages availably for compensation.
Full compensation and its relation to breach of a contract occurred in the Hungarian jurisprudence many times. Miklós Világhy suggested the reconsideration of full compensation in contract law in 1971. Attila Harmathy also suggested the implementation of foreseeability clause in the rules of contract law as the ‘best possible way to treat business relations between the parties’.
Due to the historic and social differences various forms of foreseeability are known in the legal systems.
The study examines the development of foreseeability, its first codification in the French Napoleonic Code Civil, its application in the law of the USA and some significant sentences of English courts. The first application of foreseeability was in the infamous Hadley v. Baxendale case, in which an English court worked out the meaning of contemplation rules. In the case of Victoria Laundry Ld. v. Newman Industries Ld. (1949) the court defined the meaning of foreseeability. According to the sentence of the case damages are limited to those that were foreseeable for the party at the time of entering a contract. The study also analyzes the German model of restricting damages of breach. The German theory ensures the possibility of exoneration for the violator if the other party failed to give proper information about the unusual danger of breach in the particular case. If the entitled party acted intentionally, the German law accepts exoneration. The essay demonstrates the adequate causality conception of the German law. This theory states that an act can only be the probable cause if – due to the normal and reasonable procession – it is able to cause such consequence. In our opinion foreseeability gives a stricter and much better solution of restricting damages with a more objective measurement for the obliged party on how to calculate his behavior in a certain contractual relation. The amount of risk can be predicted if the rules of damages for breach are based on foreseeability rather than adequate causality.
The new Hungarian Civil Code plans to establish objective liability in contract law. The only exoneration can be the successful reference to unavoidable external cause. Beside this stricter liability the new Civil Code also introduce the possibility of limitation in damages, the application of foreseeability clause. This seems to be a significant preference for the obliged party. As in the Hungarian legal history foreseeability clause was never used, it is an essential question how judicature will interpret the rule in practice. In our opinion for an adequate application of the new clause it is necessary to take a closer look at the United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG), the Principles of European Contract Law (PECL) and the interpretation in the American and English case law. This study tries to give some help for it.
-
Az egészségügyi dolgozók munkajogi felelőssége az egészségügyi szolgáltatás nyújtásával összefüggésben a betegnek okozott kárért
45-53Megtekintések száma:178The doctor-patient relationship requires set rules for liability considering the nature of professional norms on medicine and the protection of human life and health. According to these rules, the healthcare provideris vicariously liable for damages suffered as a consequence of healthcare servicesprovided to the patient. In such cases– on the grounds of labor law rules – the healthcare providermay transfer liability to its employee. Considering recent amendments of labor law regulations, it is essential to summarize and analyze relevant labor law norms relatedto medical liability.
The employee’s liability for damages is based on the employment relationship between the healthcare provider and the employee. Despite of the healthcare provider’s liability for damages, the employee’s liability is always personal.
According to the new labor code the employee’s liability for damages is only ascertainable if the tortfeasor did not act like a reasonable person would have actedunder given circumstances. This means that the tortfeasor’sintention or negligence is irrelevant in the course of ascertaining liability. The purpose of our study is to provide a review of the strict measure of due care in health care services, and to summarize rules about the healthcare professional’s liability for damages.
-
Értelmezési anomáliák a Bécsi Vételi Egyezmény kártérítési gyakorlatában
14-26.Megtekintések száma:232A dolgozat az ENSZ, az áruk nemzetközi adásvételi szerződéseiről szóló egyezményének a kártérítési joggyakorlatával kapcsolatos értelmezési anomáliákról szól.
Az Egyezmény rendelkezései univerzális jellegűek, így egységes értelmezést és alkalmazást követelnek meg a részes államok bíróságaitól, ezért a szabályok értelmezésével és a joghézagok kitöltésével foglalkozó 7. Cikk elengedhetetlen az Egyezmény sikeres alkalmazásához. Dolgozatomban a vonatkozó ítélkezési gyakorlat elemzésével, elsősorban arra kerestem választ, hogy a különböző országok ítészei érvényesítik-e az Egyezmény univerzialitását, a kártérítés értékelése tekintetében. A kérdés megválaszolása érdekében az Egyezmény kártérítési joggyakorlatát a 7. Cikk által támasztott értelmezési alapelvek relációjában értékeltem. Ennek keretén belül a 74. Cikk joggyakorlatának szisztematikus felülvizsgálatát végeztem el, összesen 144 jogesetet elemezve, a 2006-tól 2016-ig terjedő időszak tekintetében.
A felülvizsgálat eredménye azt mutatja, hogy kilenc olyan döntés született amikor a bíróság nemzeti kárfelelősségi doktrínát, jogintézményt, jogszabályt, vagy joggyakorlatot alkalmazott a 74. Cikk értelmezése során. Ez a megközelítés nyilvánvalóan nem segíti elő az egységesség megvalósítását. A nemzetközileg egységes szabályozás ugyanis csak akkor valósul meg, ha azt egységesen alkalmazzák. A 7. Cikk által támasztott értemezési követelményekből az következik, hogy az Egyezmény rendelkezéseit autonóm módon, a lehetséges nemzeti felfogástól megkülönböztetve szükséges értelmezni. A dolgozat keretében feltárt jogi problémák azokat a kérdéseket próbálják kiemelni, amelyek nagyobb figyelmet igényelnek a bíróságok részéről, erősítve ezzel az Egyezmény univerzális jellegét.
-
Az orvos gyógyító tevékenységének polgári jogi vonatkozásai
28-42Megtekintések száma:241The article wish to briefly cover the civil liability of the medic. The actuality of this topic is exemplified well by the fact that court trials for compensation of damages against healthcare providers show an increasing tendency year by year. It is deem important to briefly delineate the drawing of line between the civil and criminal liability during the presentation of the civil liability. After speaking about issues of drawing of line, the study is going to cover the effective liability for damages of the medic. While explaining the liability for damages of the medic, it will cover the concept of legal nature of invasive procedures, matters concerning the liability of healthcare institutions, and the basic topics of tort and contractual liability. The article is going to introduce the issues concerning illegality, the patient’s right to self-determination, his or her right to information, the obligation of medics to disclose information, in addition to matters related to the concept of the legal nature of informed consent along with the connected judicial practice in the chapter about the informed consent of the patient. As for closure, during the analysis of issues regarding evidence, it wish to cover the rules of culpability, the choice for healing methods of medics, and medical documentation, respectively.
-
A versenytilalmi megállapodás
20-28Megtekintések száma:228The “agreement on non-competition” is essentially the extension of the protection of the basic economic interest of the employer. While during the employment relationship several labor law provisions protect the interest of both parties, the “agreement on non-competition” is designed to protect the employer’s interests after the termination of the relationship. This means – in return for financial compensation – the former employee needs to refrain from any kind of business competition against his/her former employer. This necessarily involves financial compensation and may have several restrictions, such business or geographical area or time.
The previous Labor Code did not specify for detailed regulation of the issue and the law remained rather vague. It merely referred to the fact that parties – based on their own free will – may enter into such agreement. However the new Labor Code contains explicit regulations under title XVIII of the Act as “Particular Agreements Related to Employment”.
The “agreement on non-competition” belongs to the field of employment law. Unlike the previous Labor Code that categorized this possible agreement as of purely civil law in nature, the new Labor Code declares it to belong under the scope of the Labor Code. The previous regulation even ordered the provisions of the Civil Code to be applied to such agreements however the new legislation brought a conceptual change.
The currently effective regulation provides for a 2-year limitation on such conduct on the employee’s part that would create competition with the employer. The exact amount of the consideration payable for this obligation remains to be decided by the parties however the Labor Code suggests that it shall be based on how difficult the applied restrictions make it for the employee to find another job with his qualifications and experience. As a basic limit the law provides that the amount shall not be less than one-third of the base wage payable for the same period of time.
The “agreement on non-competition” is not to be confused with similar legal institutions. The paper points out two close similarities in the legal system. One being the employee’s obligation of confidentiality; this prevails after termination of the employment relationship as well without any time or similar restrictions and even without any financial compensation. The other one is the so called “non-compete” agreement from the field of competition law. This is applicable after takeovers where the seller shall refrain from engaging into business in the same area as the buyer.
In the field of labor law the time period for the “agreement on non-competition” is up to the agreement of the parties however the new law invokes an upper limit of two years that is following the termination of the employment relationship. This is a decrease from the previous regulation that provided for a period of three years. The agreement can be modified by the consent of both parties just like the employment contract or civil law agreements.
In case of violation of the agreement three cases are to be analyzed. The first is the case of the employee breaching the provisions of the contract. In this case the employee is liable for damages towards his/her former employer. The provisions of the new Civil Code and those of the Labor Code are to be applied to the damages. In the second case the employer may request an injunction to prohibit the employee from any conduct breaching the agreement while the third case involves the breach of the agreement on the employee’s part for which the rules of the Civil Code and the Labor Code are to be applied as well.
-
A bírósági jogkörben okozott kárért való felelősség és az ügyvédi felelősség összehasonlítása a felelősségi mérce szempontjából
128-148.Megtekintések száma:128A tanulmány elsősorban a szerződésen kívüli károkozásért való felelősség egyik speciális alakzatára, a bírósági jogkörben okozott kárért való felelősségre koncentrál. Az utóbbi évek gyakorlata azt mutatja, hogy a bíróságokkal szemben indított kártérítési perek elhanyagolható hányadában marasztalják az eljárt bíróságokat a jogértelmezési vagy jogalkalmazási hibáikkal a feleknek okozott károk miatt. Indokolt ezért annak vizsgálata, hogy ennek a jelenségnek milyen okai lehetnek, valamint, hogy ezek az okok indokolják-e ezt a gyakorlatot. A vizsgálat eredményeként több olyan tényező is azonosítható, amelyek külön-külön is rendkívüli módon megnehezíthetnék a bíróságokkal szembeni igényérvényesítést, kombinálva pedig szinte lehetetlenné teszik azt. Ezen tényezők között elsősorban a kirívóan súlyos jogsértés doktrínáját, valamint a keresetet a jogerős bírósági döntések tartalmi immunitására hivatkozással elutasító ítéleteket lehet megjelölni.
Kutatásmódszertani szempontból célszerű volt a bíróságok kárfelelőssége kapcsán tett megállapításokat szembe állítani az ügyvédség kárfelelősségének bírói gyakorlatával, ahol egyértelműen megállapítható volt, hogy a bíróságok sokkal szigorúbb elvárhatósági mércét támasztanak, mint a bíróságokkal szemben, holott a két jogászi hivatásrend társadalmi felelőssége és munkaterhe ezt nem indokolná. Összehasonlításra került a két jogászi hivatásrend kárfelelősségének történeti kialakulása, a felelősségük jogszabályi háttere és a kapcsolódó joggyakorlat, rövid kitekintést téve külföldi példákra is. Az átfogó elemzés alapján javaslatok megfogalmazására kerül sor a jogalkalmazás és a jogalkotó számára is.
-
A sérelemdíj funkció-analízise
97-117.Megtekintések száma:201A 2013. évi V. törvény (Ptk.) – felválta a korábbi, elméleti és gyakorlati ellentmondásoktól terhes nem vagyoni kártérítés jogintézményét – a személyiségi jogok megsértésének önálló szankciójaként vezeti be a sérelemdíjat, mely kettős funkcióval bír: egyrészt célja az, hogy akit személyiségi jogában megsértenek, olyan pénzbeli juttatásban részesüljön, amely az elszenvedett nem vagyoni sérelmeket hozzávetőlegesen kiegyensúlyozza, kompenzálja. Másrészt magánjogi büntetésnek is tekinthető a hasonló jogsértések megelőzése érdekében, preventív jelleggel.
A cél szerinti értelmezés szerint a sérelemdíj csak akkor kerülhet alkalmazásra, ha az képes betölteni a funkcióját, vagyis ha nem mutatható ki olyan nem vagyoni sérelem, amely arányos jóvátételére (elsődlegesen) hivatott lenne a sérelemdíj, akkor egyáltalán nincs helye megítélésének, hiszen a személyiséget érintetlenül hagyó jogsértések esetében kizárólag a büntető funkció érvényesülne, ami teljesen összeegyeztethetetlen a magánjog eredendően helyreállító, kiigazító jellegével.
A jogirodalom egyöntetű véleménye szerint az elsőbbség a kompenzációs funkcióé kell, hogy legyen és csak másodlagos helyet foglalhat el a magánjogi büntetés jelleg. Munkám alapján elmondható, hogy sérelemdíjra a bírák is elsősorban az elszenvedett immateriális sérelmeket orvosló, az elveszett életörömök pótlására szolgáló jogintézményként tekintenek és azt kizárólag preventív céllal nem ítélik meg, hanem az esetek döntő részében a prevenciós funkció a marasztalás összegét emelő tényezőként kerül értékelésre.
Tanulmányomban több szempontból kívánom elemezni, hogy a sérelemdíj kettős funkcióját a bíróságok hogyan értékelik az előttük fekvő ügyekben, melyik jelleg domborodik ki az összegszerűség és melyik a jogalap kapcsán. Lévén a kutatás alapvetően empirikus jellegű, ezért minél több ítélet feldolgozásán keresztül vizsgálom, hogy, milyen szempontokat értékel a judikatúra a kompenzációs (pl.: elszenvedett testi sérülések, lelki változások, életkor, a sértett családi élete, életvitel megváltozása stb…) és milyen szempontokat a prevenciós funkció (pl.: jogsértés súlya, elhúzódó jellege stb…) keretében. Végül meg kívánom válaszolni dolgozatom központi kérdését, vagyis: milyen funkciót tulajdonít a gyakorlat a sérelemdíjnak.
-
A mediáció lehetőségei a büntető igazságszolgáltatásban munkajogi szemmel
Megtekintések száma:38Mediation or agreement between perpetrator and victim in criminal law is a special form of damage reparation. Contrary to the simple reparation – where is no need to have a formal contract between the parties – mediation means a meeting between the parties to make an agreement that suits to both of them.
Development of mediation in criminal law has its roots in the birth of diversion. It was a formal legal procedure to rebuild the injured legal system and repair damages. The first programs of mediation have appeared in Canada and the United States.
Differently from the conciliation in labour law authorities have to define guidelines about forms of procedures outside the trial, about the process and modes of harmonization to preserve the prestige of state’s power of punish.
In the mediation process competence of making decisions are in the hand of the parties too. Parties have to order upon the agreement. This extra-jurisdictional form of agreement means that the potential victim gives up his right to accusation. This agreement frees the perpetrator from the criminal liability.
We can say that fundamental principles of mediation are the same in any fields of law, but mediation in criminal law has the most interesting and numerable specification because of the state power.
-
A kontinentális és angolszász jogrendszer kölcsönhatása a FIDIC Sárga Könyv tükrében
49-64Megtekintések száma:55A Tanácsadó Mérnökök Nemzetközi Szövetsége által megalkotott ún. FIDIC Könyvek az építési beruházások vonatkozásában, a projekt típusa szerint különböző szerződéses mintákat tartalmaznak, melyeknek az elsődleges célja a legjobb gyakorlat összefoglalása, és az arányos kockázatmegosztás. A FIDIC Könyvek a legnépszerűbb joganyagnak minősülnek világszerte az építési projektek vonatkozásában. A Sárga Könyv a második leggyakrabban használt szerződéses minta, melynek lényege, hogy a vállalkozó kötelezettsége a tervek elkészítésére és a kivitelezésre is kiterjed. A Sárga Könyv az angolszász jogrendszer jogelveit és jogintézményeit alkalmazza, melyből következik, hogy a szerződéses minta kontinentális jogi környezetben való alkalmazása számos jogértelmezési és jogalkalmazási problémát vet fel. A tanulmány a Sárga Könyv kontinentális jogi környezetben való értelmezésének a bemutatását követően a vállalkozó késedelemből eredő károkért való felelősségének kérdésével foglalkozik. A szerző a vizsgálódás középpontjába azt az esetkört állítja, amikor a vállalkozó késedelmét a megrendelő okozta. A szerző ebben a körben konkrét jogalkalmazási javaslatot fogalmaz meg.
-
A munkaviszony megszűnésének és megszüntetésének új szabályai a korábbi szabályozás tükrében
24-34Megtekintések száma:124From the 1st of July 2012, Act XXII of 1992 on the Labour Code, which was effective from the 1st of July 1992, had given place Act I of 2012 on the Labour Code (New Code). The New Code has brought a lot of changes concerning the cessation and termination of the employment. The univoque aim of the legislator, near reducing the number of the labour suits, was resolving the inconsistency of the practice, corresponding to the changing social and economic relations, furthermore harmonising the Hungarian law to the law of the European Union. The rules concerning the termination of the employment have not substantially changed. The New Code broadens the list of cases regulated previously. Concerning the termination of the employment, the New Code determines the ordinary dismissal as dismissal, whereas the extraordinary dismissals as dismissal with prompt effect.
At the same time, it is a new rule, that the parties could terminate the definite term employment with dismissal, if the conditions determined by the New Code emerge. The New Code has brought substantial changes concerning the rules of the dismissal protection. It constricts the number of cases when the dismissal protection could be applicable and respecting the application of the dismissal protection, it considers authoritative the moment of the notification of the dismissal. For example an expectant mother could refer to the dismissal protection, if she had notified the employer about the pregnancy before the notification of dismissal.
According to subsection 3 of section 65, there are cases, when the dismissal should not be communicated, whereas according to subsection 2 of section 68, the dismissal could be communicated, but the termination period would start earliest after the last day determined by the New Code.
The New Code, contrary to the old one, determines 6 months as the longest term of the dismissal period. The rules of the acquittal and the severance pay have not changed substantially. Regarding the dismissal with prompt effect, the legislator makes a distinction between the termination with motivation and the termination without motivation. It is a substantial modification regarding the unlawful termination of the employment, that according to the rules of the New Code, the employee could claim for damages as arrears of salary, which could not exceeds the 12 months amount of the absence fee. The restoration of the employment could be executed only in the few cases determined by section 83 and only if the employee requests for it. -
A társasági jogviszonyok szabályozása a német polgári jogi társaságban
Megtekintések száma:50Partnership under the civil code is a harsh institution in Hungarian legal system. Despite of this fact, most of the European countries apply this legal entity a lot as a background for other, more complicated corporate forms. In my essay I demonstrate those rules in German Civil Code (BGB), which show the importance and opportunities of these partnerships.
If we would like to describe the essentials of partnerships under the Civil Code, the most important question is the legal relations from both inner and external point of view. Internal relations mean an obligation between the parties, who form this partnership. It is natural that we can find both rights and commitments between founders. This is a contract but BGB says that all parties have equal rights and commitments in the same partnership. As a general rule of the Code, it is permissive, not cogent. BGB has basic regulation for operating such a partnership, but can be useful if founders live with this permissive opportunity and shape special rules for their partnership, which fit to their aims, functions, different financial potential of the parties.
There is a chance for founders to neglect building a whole structure and organization for their partnership, if they want to operate it as an inner partnership, without external relations, focusing only for the rights and omissions between the parties.
From all contract that establishes a partnership under the Civil Code membership rights follow. These rights cannot be transferred. A distinction can be made between administrational, common business management and financial rights. Rights to common business management can consist of right to information, right to supervision or the most important right to vote. Financial rights gather typical rights such as right to dividend or liquidity proportion. These rights are social omissions from the viewpoint of the partnership itself, as these are for the interest of the parties.
The most important omissions of the founders are financial contribution to establish the partnership. This regulation results from that partnership is to promote common aim of the founders, and to achieve this, all of them have to make available pecuniary or non-pecuniary assets. According to a special rule of BGB, over against the other corporate forms, members of the partnership have no omission to increase or complete their assets.
Management of the partnership is not only a right but an obligation too. A special omission is that all members and founders have to be loyal to the partnership. Because of the strong partnership character of this corporate form, this means that members have to keep the interest and aim of the partnership in view. They all are responsible for achieving the aim of the partnership and nobody can sit as a beneficiary. Loyal members have to keep secrets in connection with operating the partnership and of course the sudden obligation to inform the others of all events and experiences, which are in tight connection with the partnership and the interests of the parties. If any of the members breach these obligations, rules of damages can be applied in BGB.
Assets of the partnership are special, because no separated corporate assets form. Financial and non-pecuniary contribution becomes the assets of the community of members. It is undividable and common. But these common assets are strictly separated from the private assets of the parties. Rights for profit and deficit are equal, but this permissive rule allows different regulation in the contract. The only cogent sentence is the prohibition of societas leoniana, i.e. nobody can be precluded of profit and deficit.
External relations mean the representation of the partnership. In this case the most important law is the contract itself. In case of disagreement between the parties, there is a helping rule of BGB: members can act as a body. If we take into consideration the rules of liability, we can say that because of the lack of legal capacity of the partnership, individual liability has its important role. Generally this liability is unlimited, but there is a chance to agree with the creditor to limit liability. But this limitation is only valid for that legal transaction.
Rules for partnerships under the Civil Code in Germany are more detailed and nuanced than in Hungary. Partnership is the basic type of civil law partnerships, such as limited partnership or general partnership. We have to consider that building up a more coherent regulation for these partnerships can be useful to categorize atypical corporations.
-
Új tendenciák a légi utasok jogainak uniós szabályaiban
1-9Megtekintések száma:118Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 depending on the circumstances of the travel disruption, requires air carriers to: provide passengers with assistance, such as meals, refreshments, telephone calls and hotel accommodation; offer re-routing and refunds; pay a flat-rate compensation of up to €600 per passenger, depending on the flight distance; and proactively inform passengers about their rights.
Under the Montreal Convention (as translated by Regulation (EC) No 2027/97 into EU law), a passenger may be entitled to compensation in case of mishandled baggage (but with a limit of about €1200), except if the airline can demonstrate it has taken all reasonable measures to avoid the damages or it was impossible to take such measures. Airlines often fail to offer passengers the rights to which they are entitled in instances of denied boarding, long delays, cancellations or mishandled baggage, in particular under Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 ("the Regulation") and Regulation (EC) No 2027/97. Case law has had a decisive impact on the interpretation of the Regulation. The Commission Communication of 11 April 2011 reported on the varying interpretation being taken on the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, due to grey zones and gaps in the current text, and the non-uniform enforcement across Member States. Furthermore, it is difficult for passengers to enforce their individual rights. With regard to Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, the European Parliament asks the Commission to propose a clarification of the passengers' rights, in particular the notion of ‘extraordinary circumstances’. On 13 March 2013, the European Commission made a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 establishing
8
common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights and Regulation (EC) No 2027/97 on air carrier liability in respect of the carriage of passengers and their baggage by air. This paper takes a closer look at this proposal. The proposal aims to improve enforcement by clarifying key principles and implicit passenger rights that have given rise to many disputes between airlines and passengers in the past; and by enhancing and better coordinating the enforcement policies carried out on a national level. Issues covered by the proposal are the following.Definition of "extraordinary circumstances"
Right to compensation in case of long delays
Right to rerouting
Right to care
Missed connecting flight
Rescheduling Tarmac delays
Partial ban of the "no show" policy
Right to information
Handling of individual claims and complaints
Better take into account the financial capacities of the air carriers
Ensure better enforcement of passenger rights with regard to mishandled baggage
Adapt liability limits in accordance to general price inflation
-
A drónrepüléssel összefüggő magánjogi igények
Megtekintések száma:174The technology of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which are most commonly known as ‘drones’, is one of the most rapidly developing field of modern science. That is largely owing to the fact that drones are used in more and more fields of economy, from architecture and media to agriculture and logistics, etc. According to predictions of the European Union, the drone industry may have an income of € 10 billion annually, by 2035, and could create about 100,000 workplaces as well.[2] In addition, the number of hobby drone users is also increasing quickly, with millions of registered drone users in the United States of America alone.[3]
The nature of drones, namely the fact that these devices can soar up to 30 or more metres in the air and carry out different kind of operations (including taking photographs) by an operator on the ground may cause a lot of conflicts between drone operators and people not taking part in the operation. However, these conflicts, are unlikely to be solved without legal interference, which makes it necessary for both lawmakers and organizations applying the law to prepare for these situations in order to be able to give proper answers to the problem.
In my research, I have indicated the development of drones in a historical context and also specified the classification of drones, which allowed me to outline those types that are relevant to the subject matter. I also presented the legal background of drone flight in force, on the level of the EU legislation and also gave an insight to the previous, Hungarian legislation. Then, I started to identify those legal claims that can be especially relevant on the terrain of civil law, and concluded three main claims can be named: liability for damages, infringement on personal rights (right to one’s image and, in particular) and the civil tort of trespass to land.
I analysed all of these claims separately and in connection with each other, and found interesting problems that could have huge relevance in a legal dispute before a court. I intended to support my findings and arguments with opinions from legal scientists, court decisions from Hungary and abroad, and legislative solutions from abroad. At the end of my writing, I concluded that the described problems, and the solution that is given to them, are indeed crucial, because they will most definitely affect the way people can use drones, and neither too strict, nor too loose rules are appropriate to decide upon the subject.
-
A szerv- és szövetadományozás polgári jogi érvényesíthetõsége, avagy jogi szabályozásának ellentmondásai
Megtekintések száma:51Developments in the last centuries in the fields of pharmacy and surgery have had a beneficial effect on the treatment of various diseases and injuries. As a result these two areas have attracted the support and admiration both of the scientific world and the general public.
The examination of the effects of taking part by human beings has become unavoidable in the healing process. This relationship is unusually complex regards scientific opportunities and fragile in respect of people’s defencelessness.
Important legal background material is available today relating to organ transplantations. It must be recognized, however, that this legal corpus has been a long time in the making and is still taking shape even today. Although people are trying to establish suitable legal framework for medical law, there are still some weak points and „prejudices”. Nowadays it is necessary to make an attempt at reconciling medical science and law not forgetting about the fact that their approaches are different.
Medical law is not just about damages. Informing about the topic, the rights and the possibilities, preventing the trials: all of these things are more important. First of all, this is a life-saving procedure and money can not „repair” the problem in that case. Although it sounds cliché, it is true: you can not replace the unpurchasable organ by money. On the other hand, this should be a teamwork between the donors and recipients. They have to cooperate. The „job” of the law – which tries to be objective while it makes rules- should be to consider both views.
It is well-known that the waitinglists are very long. What is the reason? What kind of solution is able to make the waiting-time shorter? These are very serious questions but the efficient transplantation is the most important. Transplantation is one thing and surviving it is another. And top of all that there is the problem of the „tragedy of the transplantation”: it is often said that donors have no rights. Which should/ can be preferred : the right to live or the right to voluntarism?! Can you decide which system (opt-in or opt-out donation system) gives better solution?!
Giving a right answer is not so easy. Opt-out system may increase the level of available organs but it does not mean necessarily that there will be more organs for donation with absolute certainty. That is why you can not say simply that the „donor-licence” is a bad idea. There are lot of „ingredients” you should consider: technical developments, public education and last but not least social acceptance. According to the law in the opt-out system doctors should not ask the relatives about their opinions but it is said they usually do it. Is this an efficient system?!
In my opinion an effective „dialogue” is needed -not only between law and medical science but between the organ donation systems, too- for the sake of a „flexible” legal background which can take part actively in our everydays in the 21st century.
-
Az államfők nemzetközi büntetőjogi felelősségre vonásának mai keretei
40-52Megtekintések száma:56Recent years the legal position of Heads of State and other very senior State representatives has received considerable attention from national and international courts, writers and practitioners. It is often said that the establishment of the ad hoc tribunals and the International Criminal Court, reflects a growing belief that the heads of State should be held accountable for serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. It has been argued that international law is now the stage where immunity should no longer apply in relation to serious international crimes. By contrast, others have emphasized the political and practical difficulties inherent in allowing national courts to serve as a tool for the transnational enforcement of penalties or damages for crimes committed abroad by the leaders and officials of foreign States. The resulting controversy has led the International Law Commission to include the topic ‘Immunity of State officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdictions’ in its work programme.
In my study I present the development of status of the Heads of State in international law, especially the criminal liability in the XX-XXI. Centuries. In this study I exhibit the development of the legal status of the heads of State and the actual questions in international law related to the criminal liability of heads of State and other senior State officials.