Search

Search Results

• Civil law claims in the context of drone flight

  Zsolt Zsurzs

  Views:

  186

  The 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.

• The comparison of the civil law liability for the actions of courts and the civil law liability of attorneys in view of the standard of attributability

  128-148.

  Zsolt Zsurzsa

  Views:

  158

  It is a basic requirement of society that those who are infringed upon in exercising their rights, may enforce the sanctions of the infringement in a judicial process. This process is mainly executed by state courts in most legal systems, which are supposed to settle legal disputes by interpreting the relevant laws, and by taking the relevant case law into consideration. However, this is a complex process that requires professional legal knowledge from the parties. Attorneys are meant to be those professionals, who help people seeking justice to obtain their respective compensation, and also with other problems requiring legal expertise. The attorneys shall also execute this ask to the best of their knowledge. In some cases, however, this legal enforcement process may fail, which may result in the person seeking legal advice or compensation to lose its opportunity to pursue its claim permanently.
  This case might happen as a result of the actions or omissions of courts, or that of attorneys. In these cases, it is logical that the liability of these two actors of justice for the parties’ damages may be decided upon by assessing the quality of work that has led to a person suffering material damages. It would be easy to assume that the standard for the reasonable conduct for both actors is very high. However, apparently the standard for the reasonable conduct of courts seems to be a lot lower than that of attorneys in the judicial practice. In practice, only in case of the most severe infringements of courts may the injured parties receive compensation for damages, while a lot less severe infringement – or even quite the same infringements – may result in the attribution of the attorney’s liability.
  I intend to analyze this difference in the civil liability of the two actors in the light of the legal background, legal practice and the different tasks of courts and attorneys as well as the reasons of this phenomenon, and form an opinion on whether it can be justified or this practice should be discouraged. To do so, I analyze the relevant Hungarian judicial practice and legal science, and cite some foreign examples as well.