Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  civil responsibility
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
Civil responsibility for publishing a scientific article is a vague and difficult subject. In Article 38 of the Act – Press Law it is not clearly defined who and when is responsible if copyright is infringed. This article is aimed at trying to indicate when someone’s copyright is infringed, what to do if they are infringed, who is responsible for such a violation, and warn authors publishing their scientific article against such liability.
PL
Odpowiedzialność cywilna za opublikowanie artykułu naukowego jest niejasnym i trudnym tematem. W art. 38 Prawa prasowego nie jest jasno sprecyzowane, kto i kiedy ponosi odpowiedzialność, gdy zostaną naruszone prawa autorskie. Niniejszy artykuł ma na celu próbę wskazania, kiedy naruszane są czyjeś prawa autorskie, co zrobić, gdy zostaną naruszone oraz kto ponosi za takie naruszenie odpowiedzialność, a także ostrzec autorów publikujących swój artykuł naukowy przed taką odpowiedzialnością.
EN
The article describes the problem of tortious liability for failure to render assistance. There are no legal systems that establish a duty to render assistance in the provisions of civil law. This stems from the fact that in most of them, the obligation to take actions derives from criminal law that imposes direct sanctions on those who do not render assistance (e.g. France, Germany, Austria and Switzerland). Nevertheless, even the tortious liability of a person who could easily and without risk rescue another but fails to do so is highly controversial from the comparative perspective. Some legal systems (mainly in common law countries) reject tortious liability in similar cases. Some authors argue that the failure to act in those cases does not cause direct damage and that the pure omission should not provide a basis for liability. There are also opinions that this issue should remain the subject of morality rather than law, and therefore a moral sanction, not a civil one, is appropriate in this respect. For that reason, the draft amendment to Austrian tort law and the Principles of European Tort Law include explicitly such a duty to act in the draft provisions. In Polish law, Article 162 of the Polish Criminal Code of 1997 governs the obligation to render assistance. According to the legal literature, the qualification of an act or omission as wrongful in criminal law prejudges that it is also unlawful in civil law. The scope of criminal liability established on the basis of Article 162 of the Polish Criminal Code covers most cases regarded in the comparative literature as potential grounds of tortious liability. The obligation to act can also potentially arise outside the scope of the situations covered by Article 162 of the Polish Criminal Code. It is possible when the omission would be contrary to the so-called rules of social coexistence (rules of morality). In such case, the potential existence of an obligation to render assistance should depend on several circumstances. Firstly, the omission of the potential rescuer must be intentional. Secondly, potential liability should be limited only to situations where the existing danger could lead to serious bodily injury or death to the person at risk. Thirdly, the cost of preventing or removing the threat on the part of the potential rescuer should be significantly lower than the importance of legal interests of the endangered person. Fourthly, the potential rescuer needs to have a real opportunity and appropriate skills to prevent or eliminate the existing threat, whether by providing help or support to the person at risk or informing those who could do so. Moreover, the obligation to render assistance may exist in situations where there is a specific relationship (even a factual one) between the parties that justifies providing aid to each other.
Prawo Kanoniczne
|
2019
|
vol. 62
|
issue 3
55-88
EN
Violations constituting canon delicts incur certain legal effects, both penal and non penal. Among strictly penal effects one can find a possibility to call a perpetrator to account. In order to do this The Canon Law Code of 1983 classifies two types of actions connected with the committed delict:   a criminal action (actio criminalis) and an action to execute a penalty (action ad poenam exsequendam), or a penal action. A violation which is a crime may result in other, non penal effects such as an action to repair the damage caused by the crime (actio ad damna reparanda), a declaration of an obstacle to ordination, or a dismissal from a religious institute. The prescription, which is the subject of this article, is thus connected with different possible effects incurred by a violation constituting a canon delict. Keeping all those possible consequences of violations constituting canon delicts, it seems legitimate to establish the matter of the prescription. Trying to find the answers to these questions, the author tries to focus on the followingissues:1.Prescription.1.1.Introductoryissues. 1.2.Principalterms and elements. 2. Prescription within penal responsibility 2.1. Imposing and executing a penalty. 2.2. Declaring a penalty. 2.3. Delicts reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. 3. Prescription within civil and disciplinary responsibility 3.1. Action to repair damage. 3.2. Dismissal from a religious institute.
PL
Naruszenia stanowiące przestępstwa kanoniczne wywołują określone skutki prawne, zarówno karne, jak i pozaprawne. Wśród skutków ściśle karnych można znaleźć możliwość pociągnięcia sprawcy do odpowiedzialności. W tym celu Kodeks Prawa Kanonicznego z 1983 r. klasyfikuje dwa rodzaje działań związanych z popełnionym przestępstwem: skargę kryminalną (actio criminalis) oraz działanie w celu wykonania kary (action ad poenam exsequendam), czyli skargę penalną. Naruszenie będące przestępstwem może pociągać za sobą inne, niekarne skutki, jak np. skargę o naprawienie szkody wyrządzonej przestępstwem (actio ad damna reparanda), stwierdzenie przeszkody do święceń, wydalenie z instytutu zakonnego. Przedawnienie, które jest przedmiotem niniejszego artykułu, jest więc związane z różnymi możliwymi skutkami, jakie niesie ze sobą naruszenie stanowiące przestępstwo kanoniczne.Mając na uwadze wszystkie te możliwe skutki naruszeń stanowiących przestępstwa kanoniczne, zasadne wydaje się ustalenie materii przedawnienia. Próbując znaleźć odpowiedzi na te pytania, autor stara się skupić na następujących zagadnieniach: 1.Przedawnienie.1.1.Zagadnienia wstępne. 1.2.Główne pojęcia i elementy. 2. Przedawnienie w ramach odpowiedzialności karnej 2.1. Wymierzanie i wykonywanie kary. 2.2. Deklarowanie kary. 2.3. Przestępstwa zastrzeżone dla Kongregacji Nauki Wiary. 3. Przedawnienie w ramach odpowiedzialności cywilnej i dyscyplinarnej 3.1. Działanie w celu naprawienia szkody. 3.2. Wydalenie z instytutu zakonnego.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.