The world of negligent offenses
the Criminal Code, although negligence is an important criterion, as in § § 222, 229, 18, etc. Also, it is determined in § 15 that negligence punished only if it is explicitly driven (BT). A standard such as § 16 I, the precise details as to the content of the intention is there, unfortunately not for the negligence, at least not in the Penal Code. "Negligence" must be filled out but somehow content. After
hM is the core crimes of negligent breach of duty of care. This can be done haranziehen the Civil Code or similar assume that the drafters of the Penal Code have known from the civil law concept of negligence tacitly assumed.
hM is the core crimes of negligent breach of duty of care. This can be done haranziehen the Civil Code or similar assume that the drafters of the Penal Code have known from the civil law concept of negligence tacitly assumed.
§ 276 II BGB
" acts negligently if he to observe the relevant normalized care disregard. "
has to look like the care that results in" substantially "from the duties of care in other areas of law are. How to behave in traffic, for example, says the Highway Code.
What is negligence?
§ 276 II BGB: The disregard of due diligence?
What is required? Who determines the necessary care?
Civil Law: the ordinary traffic circle
Criminal Law: care standards from other areas, such as road traffic regulations, ordinances etc. But the standards are partially constrained for criminal liability, or lead to the criminalization of licentiousness! eg "injuries in javelin in physical education must be avoided at schools" would apply this standard would javelin generally prohibited, but it should not be straight. Therefore only indicative effect
, such evidence may be rebutted by the recording instrument of "objective attribution. It then goes from not having a duty of care is breached and the success is causally attributable to the negligent act.
Rather, a careful average Observer instead of the offender (hence objective) also have predicted the success need for admission and cogent evidence. This is the obj. her zurechnugn known spot "atypical causal histories," we can and must not be prepared for all possible eventualities, however absurd. This can and should have foreseen according to M. h. already eliminated the criminally relevant duty of care violation! (So item 4 in the testing scheme)
Success admission must be recognized also by the protective purpose of the criminal law standard of care external (protective purpose of the standard) and (hypothetical) lawful Alternative behavior may not just lead to success caused by the offender (Pflichtwidrigkeitszusammenhang). Next play the interference of third parties or eigenverantwortlcieh Selsbtgefährduing a role. (It then goes to the obj. Zurechnugn in the narrow sense, that is the point 5, a largely unwritten Tatbestandsmerkamel. The fact is must be the work of the perpetrator. Only the Pflichtwidirgkeitszusammenhang still hiding in the little word ...." by 'negligence caused ...
there are no special standards must be found based on experience sets a special duty of care. Such is, if concrete evidence objectively according to experience or to the increased special knowledge of the offender to the legal right or cause injury are still not generally allowed, and had therefore held a special ennen average person in the situation of the perpetrator of the act. So here is a before seeing PERMIT and must be studied.
, such evidence may be rebutted by the recording instrument of "objective attribution. It then goes from not having a duty of care is breached and the success is causally attributable to the negligent act.
Rather, a careful average Observer instead of the offender (hence objective) also have predicted the success need for admission and cogent evidence. This is the obj. her zurechnugn known spot "atypical causal histories," we can and must not be prepared for all possible eventualities, however absurd. This can and should have foreseen according to M. h. already eliminated the criminally relevant duty of care violation! (So item 4 in the testing scheme)
Success admission must be recognized also by the protective purpose of the criminal law standard of care external (protective purpose of the standard) and (hypothetical) lawful Alternative behavior may not just lead to success caused by the offender (Pflichtwidrigkeitszusammenhang). Next play the interference of third parties or eigenverantwortlcieh Selsbtgefährduing a role. (It then goes to the obj. Zurechnugn in the narrow sense, that is the point 5, a largely unwritten Tatbestandsmerkamel. The fact is must be the work of the perpetrator. Only the Pflichtwidirgkeitszusammenhang still hiding in the little word ...." by 'negligence caused ...
there are no special standards must be found based on experience sets a special duty of care. Such is, if concrete evidence objectively according to experience or to the increased special knowledge of the offender to the legal right or cause injury are still not generally allowed, and had therefore held a special ennen average person in the situation of the perpetrator of the act. So here is a before seeing PERMIT and must be studied.
Detailed examination scheme negligence
1.Täter, Taterfolg and other specific offense characteristics
wrong 2.Handlung the offender
3 . causal link between action and success
4.Objektive care Deficiency objective foreseeability of the success and the main causal history (objective = careful Durschnittsperson from the roundabout of the offender)
a) limit the duty of care by Illegal risk and
b) principle of confidence
a) limit the duty of care by Illegal risk and
b) principle of confidence
5.Objektiver attribution relation between action risks and success
a) protective purpose of the standard
b) self-responsible self-endangerment
c) Pflichtwidrigkeitszusammenhang (legitimate alternative behaviors, avoidance str.)
a) protective purpose of the standard
b) self-responsible self-endangerment
c) Pflichtwidrigkeitszusammenhang (legitimate alternative behaviors, avoidance str.)
II illegality
How willful offense absent-justification?
III. Debt
1.Schuldfähigkeit, § § 19-21
2.Spezielle debt characteristics
3.Subjektiver care violation of subjective foreseeability of the causal history and success
scale = personal knowledge and skills of the offender
scale = personal knowledge and skills of the offender
4.Fehlen excuse of the wrong reasons
5.Möglichkeit consciousness, § 17
0 comments:
Post a Comment