Theory Of Strict Liability Research Articles

CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF ROAD ORGANIZERS IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF LAW NUMBER 22 YEAR 2009 CONCERNING TRAFFIC AND ROAD TRANSPORTATION

The specific goal of this research is to know and analyze the provisions of norms or legal norms relating to the criminal liability of road organizers from the dogmatic aspects of the law and legal principles. Since there is a norm vacuum of Law Number 22 Year 2009 concerning Traffic and Road Transportation, if the road organizer does not exercise its authority, it will result in a criminal offense then this law cannot be implemented or impaired. The statement of the problem in this research is how criminal liability of the Road Organizers and Road Transportation according to Law Number 22 Year 2009 concerning Traffic and Road Transportation.
 This research is normative. The data were obtained by a detailed analysis of legal materials, primary, secondary and tertiary law. The specification of this research is the pure legal research to get a picture of one problem, namely about the criminal responsibility of the road organizer from the perspective of Law Number 22 Year 2009, concerning Traffic and Road Transportation. 
 Through the legislative approach (normative approach), which is the approach to the applicable laws and regulations to obtain a basis for discussing issues related to traffic and road transport crimes, including legislation Law Number 22 Year 2009, concerning Road Traffic and Transport Law Number 38 of 2004, Concerning Roads, Government Regulation Number 43 of 1993 concerning Road Infrastructure and Traffic. The results of the study indicate that there is a blurring of norms in Law Number 22 Year 2009, especially regarding the concept of road organizers as regulated in Article 24 and Article 273. as a result, the article cannot be operational. So that criminal liability for road organizers if they make a mistake on the formulas of article 24 and article 273 is difficult to account for. Although the organizer of the road as a legal subject if making a mistake should be responsible and can be held responsible based on the theory of strict liability and vicarious liability. The conclusion is that Law No. 22/2009 concerning Road Traffic and Transport does not regulate the concept of road organizers so that if a road organizer makes a mistake as regulated in Article 24 and Article 273 it is difficult to be accounted for, thus ensuring that there is a blurring of norms in The law and unworking.

군용비행장 소음소송의 실체법 및 소송법상 쟁점에 관한 검토

On April 11, 2001, as the first ruling to admit the national liability for damages to residents living near the Maehyang-ri shooting range was rendered, the litigations to claim damages caused by noise has been rapidly increased. In particular, recently, the lawsuits tended to be grouped, and in the case of noise lawsuits related to K2 Air Force Base in Dong-gu, Daegu, which was first filed in 2001 and concluded by the Supreme Court in 2011, ten years later, more than 150,000 plaintiffs were participated. This noise litigation is not only socially expensive due to the government"s financial burden, the possibility of new disputes over contingency fees with lawyers, and repeated claims for damages every three years.<BR> The enactment of the Military Noise Compensation Act and the establishment of a loss compensation system, like civil airports, is encouraging in that it prevents the inefficiency of resolving noise disputes through the payment of compensation for emotional distress. However, regardless of the establishment of the loss compensation scheme, because claims for damages are still available, noise litigations may continue in some cases. And as the first compensation under the Military Noise Compensation Act will be initiated only after 2022, many unresolved cases are and will be pending in courts. In particular, in the case of administrative loss compensation and civil damage compensation, there should be no significant difference in the total amount of compensation, so that additional disputes can be prevented. Since it is necessary to refer to the law of the substance law and the law of litigation law even after the ｢Noise Compensation Act｣, it is still necessary to study them.<BR> In this context, if we look at the substantive laws, we can figure out our courts have established a theory of strict liability for damages caused by defects in the installation and management of the objects, so that the victims of noise lawsuits only need to prove that the degree of damage they have suffered exceeds the acceptance limit, other than proving the state"s will or negligence or physical and external defects of the objects. Our court provides several factors to consider when setting the limit, but there is a problem that it is oversimplified or uniformly set. In addition, it is considered that the problem of repeatedly filing a lawsuit every three years is to be resolved by allowing a action for future performance in the form of periodic payments, and subsequent changes to circumstances must be resolved through a claim for Modification of Judgment for Periodic Payment.

PENERAPAN SISTEM PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PIDANA BAGI LEMBAGA PERBANKAN DITINJAU DARI TEORI-TEORI SISTEM PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PIDANA KORPORASI

The economy of the modern society is closely related or even inseparable with the world of banking. It is due to the fact that the main function of banking institutions is basically as an intermediary. However, the fact that the existence of banking institutions is as a corporation does not always have a positive impact. It can also impact negatively in the sense that the banking institution as a corporation becomes a perpetrator of criminal acts or conducts various criminal acts harmful to the public but untouchable by law.The results show that banking institutions (banks) can be categorized as corporations according to the criminal law. Consequently, as a legal subject, the bank is supposedly liable to commit a criminal offense and may be held accountable for criminal acts. The corporate criminal liability system has been legitimized and justified by several doctrines or theories: identification theory, strict liability theory, vicarious liability doctrine, the corporate culture model or company culture theory, doctrine of aggregation, and reactive corporate fault. If it is related to the subject matter, the corporate criminal liability system, as legitimized and justified by the various theories, can be applied to banking institutions. Hence, according to such theories or doctrines, the bank is deemed able to commit criminal acts and bear criminal liability. In addition, the arrangement and application of corporate criminal liability systems for banking institutions may also be justified by several fundamental or principal reasons.However, it is unfortunate that the system of criminal liability for banking institutions as a corporation is not yet applicable. This is because the current banking law is still dominated by the principle of "societas delinquere non potest" and collided with the principle of legality in criminal law. Thus, to overcome various problems that may arise in the future, the banking law needs to be revised by taking into account several things as described further in this paper.

Attribution, State Responsibility, and the Duty to Prevent Malicious Cyber-Attacks in International Law

Malicious cyber-attacks, those cyber-attacks which do not rise to the level of force in international law, pose a significant problem to the international community. Attributing responsibility for malicious cyber-attacks is imperative if states are to respond and prevent the attacks from continuing. Unfortunately, due to both technical and legal issues attributing malicious cyber-attacks to the responsible state or non-state actor is difficult if not impossible in the vast majority of attacks. Even if an injured state may recursively trace the malicious cyber-attack to the responsible IP address, this is not enough under the current international customary law to hold a state or non-state actor responsible for the cyber-attack as it is virtually impossible to bridge the air gap between the computer system and end user to demonstrate affirmatively who initiated the attack. Even if a state could demonstrate the identity of the end user that initiated the attack, this is not enough to link the end user to the state for responsibility to lie under existing customary international law. As such this study was conducted to analyze the issue of malicious cyber-attacks as a matter of customary international law to ascertain mechanism to hold states responsible for malicious cyber-attacks which originate from a state’s sovereign territory. Specifically, this study addresses the issue of legal and technical attribution of malicious cyber-attacks for the purposes of holding states responsible for those attacks. This study argues that under existing customary international law attributing malicious cyber-attacks for the purpose of ascertaining state responsibility is difficult if not impossible. As such, this study proposes alternative theories, which already exist within customary international law, for holding states responsible for malicious cyber-attacks which originate from their sovereign territory. This study addresses alternative theories of state responsibility existing in customary international law such as those put forth in Trail Smelter and Corfu Channel and the theory of strict liability for ultra-hazardous activities. In addition, this study addresses the theory of indirect responsibility, the duty to prevent harm, and due diligence in cyber-space. Lastly this study analysis the impact of the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan by the United States and NATO forces and determines that a burgeoning rule of attribution may be present which would impact the attribution of malicious cyber-attacks to states. This study makes an original and important addition to the corpus of international law by addressing the issues of technical and legal attribution, state responsibility, and the duty to prevent malicious cyber-attacks as a matter of customary international law. This study is needed; malicious cyber-attacks implicate international law, as the majority are interstate in nature. However, international law currently has no paradigm, per se, in place to effectively deal with the issue of malicious cyber-attacks.

The difficulties of environmental responsibility and ways of settling their international disputes: الصعوبات التي تواجه المسؤولية البيئية وطرق تسوية نزاعاتها الدولية

This paper dealt with procedural and substantive difficulties faced by environmental responsibility and how to overcome them, in addition to resolving environmental disputes ways. The study relied to collect and extract information from the main sources as references and basic books, research and scientific papers, lectures, and some national legislation and then take advantage of this information to come to the results of scientific value. This study was to identify the problems facing environmental responsibility, the study responded to a query search in terms of the nature of those problems and how to overcome them, where the researcher found during the study to several conclusions, perhaps the most notable: Approval of jurisprudence inadequacy tort techniques in its traditional form to overcome environmental protection problems. There are still difficulties in determining the basis of liability for environmental damage for being the place of doctrinal disputes have not been resolved conclusively because of the special nature of the environmental damage. The difficulty of self-responsibility in the field of environmental protection not only domestically but also just appeared on the international level. The financial compensation arranged by the environmental damage has not received wide acceptance in the field of environmental protection. The nature of international relations in the light of regional and international blocs, making negotiations more vital roads and palatable to solve environmental disputes. Based on these findings the study found several recommendations, perhaps the most important: the adoption of the application of all legal techniques to sort of responsibility in the field of environmental protection. Give environmental associations the right to legal representation to curb attacks on the environment. Oblige all industrial enterprises to take environmental measures. Develop the concept of diplomatic protection and international direct responsibility procedural rules relating to the settlement of environmental disputes in addition to the application of the theory of strict liability. To work on activating the consultative role of the International Court of Justice in resolving environmental disputes.

Investigating the Civil Liability of Tobacco' Propagandists in Iran: A Comparative Viewpoint toward American Legal System

One of the most important signs of a dynamic economy is commercial advertisement and presentation of products. Advertisement in fact, helps consumers to become aware of various goods and make a move for buying those needed. However, it should be noted here that whatever intended to be advertised should not be harmful to people and society; advertisement, if restricted to goods and products, would not lead to so much negative criticism, but in reality it embraces selling of imaginations, dreams, and idealistic life styles. Therefore wrong components can lead to a liability. On the other hand advertisement is increasingly related to society's health. This study aims at investigating propagandists' liability in light of the theories of civil liability. Therefore, in facing the fundamentals of civil liability in this area, the theories of guilt and strict liability are able to be examined. Studied the running rules of national and transnational domain, however, the approach considered as the basis of civil liability in this area is the theory of guilt. In the legal system of Iran, according to what was pointed out and considering the exclusive nature of tobacco, the guilt theory is ruling on the process and cycle of tobacco including production, distribution, and promotion. Considering American rules have also revealed that some rules suggest the fact that the theory of strict liability has executive capability in light of damage compensation, but the recent approach of American legislator has deviated from this standpoint and inclined toward the theory of guilt. In any case, the writer strives at investigating the position of damage compensation and fundamentals of advertisement liability, through explaining the ruling theories in this area.

Dos danos sociais

Pretende-se com o presente estudo fomentar o debate doutrinário a respeito de uma nova espécie de dano, o dano social, modalidade que se diferencia do que a doutrina vem tratando como dano moral coletivo. O assunto será exposto, metodologicamente, em sessões, que versarão sobre a conceituação, a natureza jurídica, a classificação e a legitimidade para requerer o dano social e, ainda, a quantificação, a destinação da verba condenatória, a prova e o cabimento da aplicação da teoria da responsabilidade objetiva.

X. Modelle objektiver Haftung im Deliktsrecht: Das schwerwiegende Erbe des römischen Rechts

Abstract Forms of strict liability in the law of delicts: The heavy legacy of Roman law. In Roman law there are two forms of delictual strict liability - i.e. liability for damages, regardless of the participation of the liable person to the harmful act. According to the first model, the pater familias / dominus is liable, because he is the only one in the family who can pay compensation. The second model is instead based on a reference to culpa in eligendo or in vigilando, and the strict liability is justified by the need to ensure an absolute protection of the injured person. The civilian tradition has built its theory of strict liability on this second model, speaking of culpa in vigilando or in eligendo even when - after the distinction between iniuria and culpa was introduced by Chr. Thomasius - strict liability was conceived as liability without fault. This has led to a gap, in the European civil codes, between the dogmatic construction of vicarious liability as subjective, because based on culpa, and its actual nature of objective liability, regardless of fault.

A Managerial Guide to Products Liability: A Primer on the Law in the United States—PART II A Focus on Theories of Recovery

Abstract In Part II, the authors build on Part I of this study and here focus on the theories implicit in a product liability claim: negligence, fraud and misrepresentation, and warranty—with a focus on their inherent weaknesses—leading to the creation of the now preferred theory of strict liability in tort. The context of Part II is on the common cases that provided the theoretical basis for the underlying theories, as well as to the development of strict liability. Key words: Theories of liability, negligence, warranty, fraud, strict liability

A Managerial Guide to Products Liability: A Primer on the Law in the United States

This article provides an overview or primer on the law of products liability in the United States for use in the managerial decision-making process. It focuses on the development of case law under the common law in determining a product defect, types of defects, theories of recovery, and the move to the adoption of the theory of strict liability in products cases. The article is written within the context of the Restatement of the Law of Torts. The article provides useful information to the product manager who is responsible for production decisions in a business organization. Key words: Products Liability, Product Defects, Strict Liability in Tort

Obligations Quasi Ex Delicto and Strict Liability in Roman Law

The meaning of the Gaian-Justinianic division of obligations arising from unlawful events into obligations ex delicto and quasi ex delicto has long been a puzzle for Romanists. The strict liability theory, which understands ‘quasi-delicts’ as examples of situational wrongs, defined independently of fault, was first aired in the 1940s but has never gained widespread support. The case of the iudex qui litem suam facit was regarded as a stumbling block for the theory. The present article aims to make a new and systematic case for strict liability as the basis of the quasi-delictal category and argues that, in the light of archaeological discoveries which have forced us to reconsider our understanding of the judge’s liability, we can now have a coherent picture of Roman quasi-delictal liability as liability even without fault.

Obligations quasi ex delicto and Strict Liability in Roman Law

The meaning of the Gaian–Justinianic division of obligations arising from unlawful events into obligationes ex delicto and quasi ex delicto has long been a puzzle for Romanists. The strict liability theory, which understands ‘quasi-delicts’ as examples of situational wrongs, defined independently of fault, was first aired in the 1940s but has never gained widespread support. The case of the iudex qui litem suam facit was regarded as a stumbling block for the theory. The present article aims to make a new and systematic case for strict liability as the basis of the quasi-delictal category and argues that, in the light of archaeological discoveries which have forced us to reconsider our understanding of the judge's liability, we can now have a coherent picture of Roman quasi-delictal liability as liability even without fault.

Toward a General Theory of Tort Law: Strict Liability in Context

In this extensive article I revisit my earlier writings from the 1970s that deal with tort liability in both stranger and consensual arrangements. On the former, I examine Stephen Perry’s 1988 critique of my work, and more recent contributions by Joshua Getzler and Benjamin Zipursky, to defend the view that a rigorous conception of causation under a theory of strict liability is neither logically impossible nor practically unworkable. In so doing, I reexamine the earlier efforts by writers such as Joseph Beale and H.L.A. Hart and Tony Honoré on causation in order to show how some controversial moves within their theories can be clarified without having to resort to the standard views of causation that work off the notion of “but for” causes. In addition, I explain, in connection with the critique of Jill Horwitz, why some form of a negligence system remains appropriate for medical malpractice cases. In these consensual cases, doctrines of charitable immunity for nonprofit institutions often removed the need to investigate the basis of liability. But once those were removed, a contractual system, which in practice would never embrace a strict liability rule, would often turn to some form of negligence, often coupled with institutional changes, such as arbitration and explicit limitations on contractual damages.

Richard Epstein, Strict Liability, and the History of Torts

Epstein’s strict liability model of tort law, first stated in 1973, relied on arguments derived from the history of the common law, starting with the late medieval period and extending into the nineteenth century. Since that seminal article was published, legal historical scholarship has deepened our understanding of earlier tort law and brought many new sources to bear, and it has also uncovered a pervasive if quiet Romanistic influence on doctrinal development. None of this new work overturns Epstein’s historical intuitions, and his strict liability theory can continue to claim support in the practices of the older common law.

Richard Epstein and the Cold War in Torts

The article begins with a puzzle about Richard Epstein. Coining the phrase “the Cold War in Torts” to refer to the battle between Negligence (represented by Richard Posner) and Strict Liability (represented by Guido Calabresi), the article asks, “where does Richard Epstein fit into the Cold War in Torts?” Strict liability is usually depicted as an ally of liberals, but Epstein seems to be both more conservative than Posner and more enamored of strict liability than Calabresi. How can this be? This puzzle is joined by several others: is Epstein a law and economist or a corrective justice theorist or both? How can the anti-government author of Takings be an advocate of a tort law ready to have the state imposing strict liability left and right in private law? These problems and several others turn out to be readily explicable when the depth and historical subtlety of Epstein’s views are taken seriously and also when his approach to interpretive questions of tort doctrine are carefully separated from his normative views on various policy questions. The greatest challenge presented by Epstein’s tort scholarship stems from his 1973 article A Theory of Strict Liability and Professor Stephen Perry’s well known critique of that article, The Impossibility of General Strict Liability. The questions presented are: (a) whether a paradigms-centered conception of causation in torts is worth seeking; (b) whether such a conception of causation must utilize a notion of responsibility that is normatively rich, rather than value-free; and (c) whether a normatively rich, paradigms-based conception of causation and responsibility yields a theoretical framework importantly different from the negligence-based conception of tort law put forward by Posner, and Prosser before him. The last half of the article answers “yes” to all three of these questions, utilizing Epstein’s 1973 article as a source of insights for a powerful and historically rooted wrongs-based framework in tort theory.

A Positive Theory of Strict Liability

In spite of its tenure as the prevailing economic theory of strict liability, the proposition that strict liability should be preferred to negligence when it is desirable to reduce injurers’ activity levels rather than victims’ activity levels raises a few questions. First, when should we prefer to reduce injurers’ activity levels rather than victims’? Second, why should we not hold both victim and injurer strictly liable? This paper provides a model that answers these questions more effectively than the prevailing economic model. The model presented here offers specific predictions that are consistent with the detailed law on strict liability and the appearance of strict liability in pockets rather than as an across-the-board default rule. The choice between strict liability and negligence depends on the degree to which there is a reciprocal exchange of risk among actors, and the extent to which benefits, in addition to risks, are externalized.

Product liability: An ethical analysis with a focus on the theory of strict liability

If consumers have a right to expect that products on the market will be fit for their intended use then the producers, and sellers have a responsibility for the quality and safety of their products and for the compensation for harms and injuries that originate from products and their defects. Quality control implies issues regarding acceptable levels of risk, consumer autonomy and competence, and paternalism. Product liability regulation has been subject to three theories: contractarian, due care theory, and strict liability theory. The last one has been explored in more details and put under a thorough ethical scrutiny. The result is that strict liability theory, despite being to a certain degree counterintuitive, is the best theory for dealing with the issue of compensations.

A Critique of the Strict Liability Standard for Determining Child Support in Cases of Male Victims of Sexual Assault and Statutory Rape

t B.A. 2001, Cornell University; J.D. Candidate 2005, University of Pennsylvania. I am grateful to Professor Jennifer Rosato and to Michelle Seldin for their insightful comments and conversations on these issues. Indraneel Sur generously contributed editorial assistance and invaluable advice at every step of this process, and Nick Marsilio kindly shared his research. I especially thank the editors at the University of Pennsylvania Law Review for putting so much energy into this piece and for being so supportive of my work. They all worked with incredible care, and I note that all errors are entirely my own. Finally, I thank Ethan Simonowitz, as this Comment is as much his as it is my own. S.F. v. State ex rel. T.M., 695 So. 2d 1186, 1188 (Ala. Civ. App. 1996). 2County of San Luis Obispo v. Nathaniel J., 57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 843, 843 (Ct. App. 1996) (citation omitted). Laura W. Morgan, It's Tetn O'Clock: Do You Know Where Your Sperm Are? Toward a Strict Liability Theory of Parentage, 11 DIVORCE LITIG. 1, 7 (1999), available at http:// www.childsupportguidelines.com/articles/artl99903.html.

Property Owners May Be Liable for Defective Products Offered to Guests by a Third-Party Tenant

Based on the theory of strict liability the Florida Supreme Court ruled in favor of a plaintiff who sued a resort operator for injuries she sustained from recreational equipment that she rented from a commercial tenant of the resort. The resort owner and equipment-rental operator were closely allied regarding promoting the equipment to the resort's guests, and a lessor-leasee relationship clearly existed between them. Florida's supreme court determined that the strict-liability doctrine is not limited to manufacturers and distributors of defective products but also applies to commercial renters of such products. The court went on to hold the resort liable because it leased property to an outsider who rented sailboats and because the resort was actively involved in marketing those sailboats to the resort's guests. In fact, the resort's active marketing of the sailboats to its guests may have tilted the scale in favor of the finding of liability on the part of the resort. Also, the court inferentially alluded to an apparent-agency theory of responsibility based on representations of ownership and control normally associated with franchiser-franchisee responsibility.

Products liability: A technical and ethical challenge

Products liability is a term that has been around a long time, but has had very little impact on the technical community, except under unusual conditions. However, since 1963, when the theory of strict liability was first established and it started to be adopted by the majority of the states, there has been a decided change. One of the reasons for the technical community to be uneasy about the effects of products liability on their livelihood and on the contributions to the world at large is the fact that many of us do not fully realize the impact products liability rules in the various courts can have on the technical community. The purpose of this paper is to present to the technical community an engineering or technical interpretation of a few examples of the technical problems that are associated with products liability in order to present the technical challenge of doing the task. The rules of products liability are changing rapidly. They affect the ethics of decision making by the quality specialist long before an accident. This paper will emphasize recent legislation in the various states and in Congress with examples taken from recent court decisions to illustrate the challenge to the ethics of the technical specialist.