A person who has caused harm to a citizen, property of a citizen, property of a legal entity has obligations as a result of causing harm, and, as a general rule, the person should be liable for the harm caused.
Instructions
Step 1
However, civil law says that when considering such a case, taking into account all the circumstances, the court can:
- to oblige to compensate the harm not to the person who caused the harm, but to the person in whose interests the harm was caused;
- partially exempt from compensation for harm;
- completely exempt from compensation for harm.
Criminal law stipulates that it is not a crime to cause harm in a state of urgency. Evidence of the following must be gathered to substantiate urgency.
Step 2
The existence of a danger threatening both the perpetrator of harm and other persons, the interests of society or the state, who are protected by law. The danger must be real and inevitable.
For example, a person, in order to gain access to a hydrant and extinguish a fire in a house where people are, breaks a shop window. The danger is real and inevitable.
At the same time, both people committing unlawful encroachments and animals, natural forces of nature, sources of increased danger, various faulty mechanisms, etc., can be recognized as a source of danger.
Step 3
The impossibility of eliminating the hazard by other means, when an emergency is the only way to prevent the hazard.
If there is another hydrant nearby that can be used to extinguish a fire, and which this person can use, then the damage to the shop window will not be recognized by the court as an emergency.
Step 4
The harm done in a state of urgency is less than the harm avoided.
In the example under consideration, the store suffered significant material damage, but the prevented damage to property, as well as to the health and life of citizens in the burning house is much greater.
Exceeding the limits of extreme necessity is such infliction of harm when the harm clearly does not correspond to the threatened danger and the existing circumstances, and also when the harm caused is equal or even more significant than the harm prevented. The value of specific benefits and interests is established by the court, taking into account the specific situation, the importance of the object that was harmed and the object that was protected. For the application of the rules of emergency by the court, a mandatory combination of all three of the above conditions is required.
