(magistrska naloga)
Dani Manfreda (Author), Matjaž Ambrož (Mentor)

Abstract

Primer Karneadove deske ni zgolj primer dveh mornarjev, ki se po brodolomu znajdeta v vodi in se soočita z dilemo žrtvovanja enega izmed njiju, temveč se lahko uporabi kot metafora za vse tiste situacije, ko v podobnih ekstremnih situacijah pristanejo na tehtnici človeška življenja in pride do žrtvovanja enega človeškega življenja za ohranitev življenja drugega. Primeri, ko se človek znajde v takšnih ekstremnih okoliščinah, ko mora izbrati med lastno smrtjo ali pa žrtvovanjem druge osebe za ohranitev svojega življenja, so bili v različnih variacijah predmet številnih razprav skozi zgodovino. Danes se evropski kontinentalni kazenskopravni sistemi in common law sistemi zelo različno soočajo z navedeno problematiko skrajne sile. Prvi v večini sledijo teoriji diferenciacije in razlikujejo med dvema vrstama skrajne sile, kjer je opravičljiva skrajna sila namenjena reševanju primerov Karneadove deske in je torej lahko storilec opravičen kaznivega dejanja, common law sistemi na drugi strani pod vplivom precedenčnih sodb še vedno zastopajo veliko bolj konservativen pristop in storilcu ne priznavajo obrambe s skrajno silo.

Keywords

kazensko pravo;Karneadova deska;skrajna sila;eksistancialne stiske;upravičenost;opravičenost;protipravnost;sporazum o priznanju krivde;krivda;diferenčna teorija;magistrske diplomske naloge;

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Typology: 2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization: UL PF - Faculty of Law
Publisher: [D. Manfreda]
UDC: 343(043.2)
COBISS: 16215121 Link will open in a new window
Views: 1083
Downloads: 331
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: ǂThe ǂproblem of the plank of Carneades in criminal law
Secondary abstract: The Plank of Carneades case is not just an example of two seamen who find themselves in the water after the shipwreck and are faced with the dilemma of sacrificing one of them, but can be used as a metaphor for all those similar extreme situations when one person's life needs to be sacrificed to preserve the life of another. Examples when a person finds himself in such extreme circumstances when he has to choose between his own death or the sacrifice of another person to preserve his life, has been subjected to numerous discussions throughout history in different variations. Today, European continental criminal law systems and common law systems are very different in dealing with the above-mentioned necessity problems. The European continental criminal law systems in the majority follow the pluralistic theory and distinguish between two types of necessity, where one of them is dealing with existential distress cases and acknowledges perpetrator the necessity defense in such cases. Common law systems on the other hand, under the influence of precedent judgments, still advocate a far more conservative approach, where the perpetrator is not acknowledged the necessity defense.
Secondary keywords: criminal law;The Plank of Carneades;necessity;existential distresses;justifiability;excusability;wrongfulness;culpability;pluralistic theory;
Type (COBISS): Master's thesis/paper
Study programme: 0
Embargo end date (OpenAIRE): 1970-01-01
Thesis comment: Univ. v Ljubljani, Pravna fak.
Pages: 38 f.
ID: 10942444