diplomsko delo
Marjana Miklavčič Podbelšek (Author), Mitja Novak (Mentor)

Abstract

POVZETEK Pri kakršnem koli ravnanju človeka ali opravljanju sleherne dejavnosti, dela oz. lahko nastane škoda, ki jo ima oškodovanec ob določenih pogojih pravico dobiti povrnjeno. Enako je lahko v situaciji pri delu delavca, v delovnem razmerju, s tem da je delavec lahko povzročitelj škode ali oškodovanec na drugi strani. Zakon o delovnih razmerjih ureja primere, ko delavec na delu ali v zvezi z delom delodajalcu povzroči škodo, vendar delavec odgovarja za nastanek škode le, če je škodo povzročil namenoma ali iz hude malomarnosti. Odgovornost delavca za storjeno škodo se presoja mnogo manj strožje, kot odgovornost delodajalca za škodo delavca, ravno tako pa mu lahko delodajalec storjeno škodo ali odpiše ali zmanjša. V delovnem razmerju pa večkrat nastanejo primeri, ko delavec pri delu ali v zvezi z delom povzroči škodo tretji osebi. V takšnih primerih Zakon o delovnih razmerjih napotuje na 147. člen Obligacijskega zakonika. V tem primeru ni pomembno ali je delavec ravnal tako, kot se od njega zahteva, temveč ali je ravnal tako, kot bi moral ravnati njegov delodajalec. Gre za običajno strožja merila, zato je večinoma delodajalec dolžan tretji osebi povrniti škodo. Odgovornost delodajalca za primer poškodbe delavca pri delu ali v zvezi z delom je določena v 184. členu Zakona o delovnih razmerjih, kjer je določeno, da mora delodajalec delavcu, ki mu je bila pri delu ali v zvezi z delom povzročena škoda, le-to povrniti po splošnih pravilih civilnega prava. To pomeni, da delodajalec za škodo lahko odgovarja krivdno (namen, huda in tudi majhna malomarnost), pa tudi objektivno, to je celo brez kakršnekoli krivde. Odškodninsko zavezo delodajalca v ožjem smislu se v konkretnih primerih ugotavlja s preučevanju temeljnih predpostavk odškodninske odgovornosti – škode, škodljivega dejstva – ravnanja, vzročne zveze in odgovornosti delodajalca. V kolikor so izpolnjene vse temeljne predpostavke odškodninske odgovornosti, mora delodajalec svojemu delavcu izplačati nastalo škodo. Z sklenjeno zavarovalno pogodbo lahko delodajalec prevali breme posledic tovrstne odškodninske odgovornosti na zavarovalnico. Pri zavarovanju odgovornosti ima oškodovanec na voljo direktni zahtevek proti zavarovalnici. Oškodovancu predhodno ni potrebno seznanjati odgovornih oseb, da je vložil zahtevek za povračilo škode. Vendar zavarovalnica jamči za škodo pod drugačnimi pogoji kot odgovorna oseba (zavarovanec oz. delodajalec) in jamči le v okviru zavarovalne pogodbe, s katero pa so možne različne omejitve ali izključitve jamstva. Pri odgovornostnih zavarovanjih se največkrat pojavljajo sledeče vprašanja: stopnja odgovornosti zavarovanca, ki je krita z zavarovanjem (lahka malomarnost, huda malomarnost), časovna opredelitev zavarovalnega primera (kdaj se šteje, da je nastopil zavarovalni primer, ki je krit z zavarovalno pogodbo), zneskovna omejitev jamstva oz. zavarovalna vsota (po dogodku, po zahtevku, letni agregat) in soudeležba zavarovanca – franšiza. V skladu z zavarovalno pogodbo je zavarovalnica dolžna preučiti zahtevke tako po utemeljenosti kot po višini in ugoditi upravičenim zahtevkom ter poskrbeti za obrambo zavarovanca pred neutemeljenimi ali pretiranimi odškodninskimi zahtevki, ter zavarovanca tudi zastopati v morebitnih sodnih postopkih.

Keywords

delovno pravo;delovna razmerja;poškodbe pri delu;odškodnine;zavarovanja;diplomska dela;

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Source: Maribor
Typology: 2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization: UM PF - Faculty of Law
Publisher: [M. Miklavčič Podbelšek]
UDC: 34(043.2)
COBISS: 4237355 Link will open in a new window
Views: 10143
Downloads: 1168
Average score: 0 (0 votes)
Metadata: JSON JSON-RDF JSON-LD TURTLE N-TRIPLES XML RDFA MICRODATA DC-XML DC-RDF RDF

Other data

Secondary language: English
Secondary title: EMPLOYER LIABILITY FOR INJURIES AT WORK IN THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA AND THE POSSIBILITY TO TAKE OUT INSURANCE
Secondary abstract: SUMMARY While conducting any form of activities, working or during any other human actions, damage may occur and under certain conditions the aggrieved party is entitled to compensation. The same applies in situations with a worker in an employment relationship, but the worker may act as an aggrieved party or as the person responsible for the damage. The Employment Relationship Act handles cases, when a worker causes damage to the employer while working or in relation to work, but the worker is held responsible for the damage only if it is a result of deliberate actions or severe neglicence. The worker’s liability for the occurred damage is judged considerably more lenient than the employer’s liability for damages to the worker and the employer also holds the option of writing off or reducing the scale of the damage. But in an employment relationship there are many instances in which the worker, during work or work related activities, causes damage to a third party. In such instances the Employment Relationship Act directs to Article 147 of the Code of Obligations. In such instances it is not important whether the worker acted accordingly, but rather if he/she acted as his/her employer should have. These criteria are usually stricter, therefore in most instances the employer is obliged to compensate for damages to the third party. The employer’s liability for injuries of a worker during work or work related activities is determined by Article 184 of the Employment Relationship Ac, where it is determined that the employer is obliged to compensate the worker for damages, which occurred during work or work related activities, according to general principles of civil law. This means that the employer may be held responsible due to culpability (intention, severe and also minimal negligence) and also objectively, meaning even without any culpability. The employer’s tort liability in a narrow sense and in actual instances is determined by studying fundamental prepositions of tort liability – damage, damaging fact – handling, causal connection and employer’s liability. Forasmuch all fundamental prepositions of tort liability are fulfilled, the employer is obliged to compensate the worker for occurred damages. With a concluded insurance contract the employer may transfer the burden of consequences of such tort liability to the insurance company. With liability insurance the aggrieved party holds the option of a direct claim towards the insurance company. The aggrieved party is not obliged to notify liable parties in advance on his liability claim application. But the insurance company is liable for damages under conditions different to those of a liable party (insured person or employer) and only in accordance with the insurance contract, which may determine various limitations or liability exclusions. When it comes to liability insurances, the following questions most often arise: insured person’s level of responsibility, which is covered by the insurance (minimal negligence, severe negligence), timing estimate of the insured instance (when is it considered that the insured instance, which is covered by the insurance contract, took place), liability insurance limit or insurance sum (according to the event, according to the claim, annual aggregate) and insured person participation – franchise. According to the insurance contract the insurance company is obliged to study claims both according to merits as well as the amount, to grant justified claims, to provide the insured person with protection from unreasonable or excessive liability claims and also to represent the insured person in potential judicial proceedings.
Secondary keywords: employment relationship;injury at work;tort liability;damage;compensation;insurance;insurance contract.;
URN: URN:SI:UM:
Type (COBISS): Undergraduate thesis
Thesis comment: Univ. v Mariboru, Pravna fak.
Pages: 74 f.
Keywords (UDC): social sciences;družbene vede;law;jurisprudence;pravo;pravoznanstvo;
ID: 1014949