Other issues of liability

This chapter explains when a person can be liable for failing to act. It also explores the concept of vicarious liability whereby a public body or company can be liable for the acts of employees. It also considers the circumstances in which a company can itself be liable for a crime. The chapter addresses the possibility of no fault liability which is used in some jurisdictions.

A munkáltató kártérítési felelőssége az atipikus munkaviszonyokban

"Employers’ liability for damages is an extremely strict, no-fault liability. In practically all cases, employers are liable for employment-related damages suffered by employees. Rules on employers’ liability for damages has been changed in many aspects by the Hungarian code of labour law in the private sector, Act I of 2012 on the Labour Code (hereinafter referred to as Labour Code). These changes have introduced some, generally private law institutions into the assessment of liability, such as the foreseeability clause. The application of these rules raises a lot of questions even in typical employment relationships, while for atypical employment relationships it is especially true. We must realize that the system of the employers’ liability for damages has been designed for conventional employment relationships. The purpose of this presentation and study is to review to what extent the rules governing employers’ liability for damages may be applied for atypical employment relationships unobjectionably, e.g. remote working, or for atypical elements of typical employment such as home office."

Techno-Determinism in Private Law: Influence of Bioprinting on Developing the Concept of Protecting the Right to Digital Image

Introduction: the new technological revolution became a trigger in the development of the non-pecuniary benefits concept. In the context of digital transformation, personal privacy protection appears to be a serious problem. A person is found to be in a vulnerable position facing challenges of the new digital reality. This could be illustrated by the example of bioprinting since this technology is connected with digitalization of the human body and creation of its digital three-dimensional model. As a result, a person is becoming dependent on their three-dimensional digital embodiment in implementing their rights to life and health. Evolution in the concept of the right to personal image through recognition of the right to digital image appears as the private law response to the technological challenges. Purpose: to identify and analyze the major problems related to protection of the human right to digital image in bioprinting, as well as to determine an effective model of tort liability for encroachment on the personal digital image associated with the use of bioprinting technologies. Methods: dialectical, formal logical, functional, and other general scientific research methods, as well as special legal methods, including comparative legal and formal legal techniques. Results: the author has studied legal and philosophical problems associated with the bioprinting technology influence on the concept of protecting non-pecuniary benefits and its development; identified a trend associated with the evolution of the human right to digital image; considered the models of tort liability for encroachment on the personal digital image in European law in the comparative legal aspect; formulated prognostic conclusions concerning the model of liability for damage caused by violation of the right to digital image in Russian law. Conclusions: information about a person objectified in a digital three-dimensional model (CAD-file) deserves special protection. The possibility of access and use of such information about a person creates serious risks of causing damage to them. A person’s vulnerable position in bioprinting technologies indicates the need to recognize an absolute non-pecuniary right with a person to their digital image registered in the corresponding digital model (CAD-file). The philosophical and legal concept of human vulnerability serves as a theoretical foundation for the elaboration of solutions aimed at creating an efficient set of tools for protecting the human right to digital image. This concept was manifested in the European law in expanding the possibility of compensation for non-pecuniary damage, its presumption in case of encroachment on non-pecuniary benefits, as well as establishment of the no-fault liability standard. It is necessary to introduce in Russian legislation a special tort establishing the no-fault liability standard for damage caused by encroachment on a personal digital image. Presumption of moral damage in such encroachments, as well as the possibility of recovering exemplary damages from a delinquent, would correspond to the goals of general and special prevention.

4. Strict liability

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the crime of strict liability. A strict liability offence is one which does not require mens rea in respect of at least one element of the actus reus. Strict liability is often referred to as no-fault liability. Strict liability is very rare at common law. Where a statute is silent as to mens rea, the judge must interpret the provision to decide if the offence has mens rea (the starting point) or is one of strict liability. There is a debate about whether the imposition of criminal liability in the absence of proof of fault can be justified.

Private Law Liability for Faulty ICT

This chapter considers instances where ICT applications cause physical, material, economic, or emotional harm, with a focus on third party liability or tort law. The chapter should be read as an important example of how private law liability may step in to deter the development, sale, or usage of faulty ICT. It discusses the relevant legal conditions of damage, causation, fault liability, and strict liability, ending with questions around compensation and deterrence as the overarching goals of tort law.

Some Rule-of-Law Anxieties about Strict Liability in Private Law

Strict liability plays a significant role in many legal systems, in both criminal and private law. Its occasional use attracts a weary toleration from legal thinkers, but few stand up for it with enthusiasm, and few argue for its extension. Injustice challenges to strict liability take more than one form. This chapter focuses on those that see the injustice of strict liability as bound up with a failure, on the law’s part, to conform to the ideal of the rule of law. These challenges can be contrasted with those that complain of the injustice of attaching liability to morally blameless actions. Although strict liability is no-fault liability in a special lawyers’ sense of ‘fault’, it also extends in the process to many who are not at fault in the ordinary moral sense of ‘fault’, i.e. many whose actions are morally blameless.

Strict Liability for Damage Caused by Self-Driving Vehicles: The Estonian Perspective

In the case of damage caused by a conventionally driven vehicle, it is usually possible in EU Member States to subject the possessor/controller of the vehicle to heightened tortious no-fault liability, i.e. strict liability. The development and possible introduction of self-driving vehicles pose a challenge also for tort law, because it is unlikely that self-driving vehicles will not cause any damage to third parties. With the application of strict liability in mind, this article attempts to identify possible differences between damage caused by a conventional vehicle as opposed to that caused by a self-driving vehicle. In light of this developing technology the key legislative question to be answered is whether the introduction of self-driving vehicles calls for, among other things, the revision of strict liability rules. Answers to these questions are sought mainly based on Estonian tort law.

Civil Law Consequences of the Non-Adjustment of an Insurance Product by the Distributor to the Demands and Needs of a Customer

According to the author, only in certain situations may the non-adjustment of insurance products to the demands and needs of the customer lead to the invalidity of insurance contract terms, or be remedied by the interpretation thereof in favour of the customer. Thus, the basic legal remedy which can be used by the customer in such case is to claim damages from the distributor. As a rule, distributors assume contractual liability based on the presumption of fault: in the case of brokers arising from brokerage contract, and in case of other distributors from obligations specified in the provisions of the Insurance Distribution Act. Insurers bear tortious non-fault liability for the activities of their dependent agents. Basically, clients may claim full damages according to the so called “difference theory”. In many cases however the damages will be restricted to the value of the overpaid insurance premium.