Search

Published After
Published Before

Search Results

  • The Significance of the Right to Repair Directive in Promoting Sustainable Consumption in the Light of Consumer Contracts
    21-45
    Views:
    113

    The process of the green transition is increasingly influencing European Union policies, legal fields, and institutions, and consumer protection law is no exception. The promotion of sustainable consumption through consumer contract law first gained prominence in 2019 and became a more intensive focus in 2024.

    This study aims to analyze and assess the reception of sustainable consumption in EU law, with particular attention to Directives 2019/771 and 2024/1799. The analysis focuses on how these directives introduced new legal instruments into harmonized contract law and how these instruments can simultaneously serve the high-level protection of consumers and the promotion of sustainable consumption.

    The study does not seek to provide a comprehensive overview of the competition law and intellectual property law challenges surrounding the right to repair. These legal fields are mentioned only insofar as they fulfill a consumer protection function.

  • Possibilities of mediation in the criminal procedure with the eye of a labour lawyer
    Views:
    152

    Mediation 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.

  • Enforceability of the civil law in connection with organ donation, the lack of legal framework
    Views:
    131

    Developments 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. 

  • Functional Analysis of Damage Charges
    97-117.
    Views:
    401

    Replacing the legal institution for non-pecuniary damages burdensome by previous theoretical and practical contradictions, Act V of 2013 (Civil Code) introduces damage charges as a separate sanction for violation of personal rights, which has dual functions: on the one hand, it aims for the person being injured in its personal rights receive a monetary allowance that approximates or compensates for the non-material damage suffered. On the other hand, it can also be considered as a punishment under private law for the prevention of similar infringements, as a deterrent.

    According to the intended interpretation, the damage charge can only be applied if it is able to fulfill its function, i.e. if no non-pecuniary damage can be detected for which the damage charge is intended for proportional compensation (primarily), it has no place at all since in the case of infringements leaving the personality untouched, only the punitive function would be exercised, which is completely incompatible with the inherently remedial, corrective nature of private law. According to the unanimous opinion of the legal literature, the compensatory function should have priority and private punishment only take precedence of a secondary nature. On the basis of my work, it is noticeable that judges also consider damage charges as a legal instrument to repair the immaterial injuries suffered and to compensate for the lost pleasures of life, and to not order it upon preventive reasons solely, but in the plurality of cases, preventive function is being evaluated as a factor enhancing the amount of the damage. In my study, I wish to analyze from several aspects, how the dual function of the damage charge is assessed by the courts concerning present cases, by highlighting which nature is protruding concerning the amount or the legal basis. As the research is basically empirical, I will examine through as many judgments as possible, what aspects the courts evaluate in the framework of the compensational (e.g.: physical injuries, mental changes, age, family life of the victim, change in lifestyle, etc.) and of the preventive function (e.g. the gravity of the infringement, its protracted nature, etc.). Finally, I would like to answer the central question of my thesis: what function does practice attribute to the payment of damage charges.