必要性评估是在有害恢复研究所进行的吗?

H. Koziol
{"title":"必要性评估是在有害恢复研究所进行的吗?","authors":"H. Koziol","doi":"10.24031/1992-2043-2021-21-2-217-244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article of one of the most prominent contemporary representatives of “bewegliches System” conception of private law regulation provides a thorough examination of factors influencing the leading approachs to assessment of fault in german speaking jurisdictions. The author comes to conclusion that unconditional adherence to unified (either subjective or objective) approach shall not attend to the ends pursued by particular intitutions aggregated under the name of civil liability, whereas the ethically underpinned concept of liability requires subjective approach as a general rule for noncontractual liability.","PeriodicalId":35992,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"IS THE NECESSITY ASSESSMENT AT THE INSTITUTE OF HARMFUL RECOVERY?\",\"authors\":\"H. Koziol\",\"doi\":\"10.24031/1992-2043-2021-21-2-217-244\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article of one of the most prominent contemporary representatives of “bewegliches System” conception of private law regulation provides a thorough examination of factors influencing the leading approachs to assessment of fault in german speaking jurisdictions. The author comes to conclusion that unconditional adherence to unified (either subjective or objective) approach shall not attend to the ends pursued by particular intitutions aggregated under the name of civil liability, whereas the ethically underpinned concept of liability requires subjective approach as a general rule for noncontractual liability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35992,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24031/1992-2043-2021-21-2-217-244\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24031/1992-2043-2021-21-2-217-244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章是当代最杰出的代表之一的私法规制的“bewegliches系统”的概念提供了一个全面的因素,影响主要的方法来评估过错在德语司法管辖区。作者的结论是,无条件地坚持统一的(主观或客观的)方法,并不适用于以民事责任为名的特定机构所追求的目的,而道德基础的责任概念要求主观方法作为非合同责任的一般规则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
IS THE NECESSITY ASSESSMENT AT THE INSTITUTE OF HARMFUL RECOVERY?
The article of one of the most prominent contemporary representatives of “bewegliches System” conception of private law regulation provides a thorough examination of factors influencing the leading approachs to assessment of fault in german speaking jurisdictions. The author comes to conclusion that unconditional adherence to unified (either subjective or objective) approach shall not attend to the ends pursued by particular intitutions aggregated under the name of civil liability, whereas the ethically underpinned concept of liability requires subjective approach as a general rule for noncontractual liability.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review (CR-CL) is the nation’s leading progressive law journal. Founded in 1966 as an instrument to advance personal freedoms and human dignities, CR-CL seeks to catalyze progressive thought and dialogue through publishing innovative legal scholarship and from various perspectives and in diverse fields of study.
期刊最新文献
ON THE IMPACT OF THE REGISTRATION SYSTEM OF THE REAL ESTATE TURNOVER THE PRICIPLES OF CIVIL LIABILITY (finale) ON THE DEFECTS OF THE DEFINITION OF THE CONCEPT “LAND PLOT” IN THE FEDERAL LAW NO. 430-FZ INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC AND PRACTICAL CONFERENCE “RECENT HISTORY OF PRIVATE LAW: TO THE 30TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE RESEARCH CENTRE” THE IMPUTATION OF HARM TO A PERSON WHO IS ECONOMICALLY EASIER TO BEAR ITS CONSEQUENCES AS AN ARGUMENT FOR SOLVING THE PROBLEM OF ALTERNATIVE CAUSATION IN TORT LAW
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1