The topic of this diploma thesis is the concept and legal consequences of excessive self-defence and necessity. The aim of the thesis is to introduce and describe the conditions of using these defences and to focus on issues of case law in connection with them. Criminal law is an essential part of everyday life. This diploma thesis focuses on analysis of all conditions imposed by Czech legislation as well as Irish legislation. It is composed of seven chapters and each chapter deals with different issues. The first chapter is an introduction to the whole thesis: it sets out aims and the methods used for achieving them. The second chapter deals with the definition of the concept of justification with the basic features of these circumstances and highlights the basic foundations for behaviour under self-defence or necessity. The third chapter is fully devoted to regulation of necessity, focusing on its basic conditions. Each condition is explained and described separately with references to the case law. One part of this chapter deals with the excess in behaviour under necessity and the following solutions in criminal trial. The fourth chapter deals with the concept of self-defence in the Czech Republic, defining it and analysing its basic conditions. Examples from the case are discussed and analysed...

The focus of the thesis is set on the controversial issues connected with a legal institute of Czech criminal law called "self-defence", and how these controversial issues were dealt with within judicial practice. The first chapter serves as an introduction to the whole topic. The second chapter describes the concept of self-defence, as well as its prerequisites. The self- defence was classed into the system of criminal law. The goal of the third chapter is to define preconditions which are necessary in connection with application of the self-defence institute. The main parts of this chapter describe firstly attacking, first of all and secondly defence. Subsections of this chapter analyse the term of attacking itself, the attacker and his characteristics, the term of harmfulness of such attacks towards society. As for the second part of the third chapter it focuses on the defence itself, its proportionality etc. The fourth chapter is about the role of judicial practice within the context of Czech legal system. This chapter serves as a relevant contribution to the main part of the thesis, which is chapter five. Chapter five introduces specific cases, especially those which were at some point controversial. The specific case is briefly described and the controversial issue is named and further...

Šiame diplominiame darbe nagrinėjamas civilinių teisių gynybos institutas – savigyna. Lietuvoje ji buvo žinoma nuo seniausių laikų. Sovietų Sąjungai okupavus Lietuvą, savigyna buvo uždrausta. Kadangi šiuolaikinėje Lietuvos civilinėje teisėje šis institutas atsirado kartu su naujuoju Civiliniu kodeksu, Lietuvos teisės teoretikų jis dar beveik neanalizuotas. Teismų praktika taikant savigyną reglamentuojančias teisės normas irgi labai nedidelė. Visa tai nulėmė autoriaus pasirinkimą plačiau paanalizuoti savigyną Lietuvos civilinėje teisėje. Darbe magistrantas atskleidžia savigynos teisinę prigimtį, t. y. nurodo jos vietą civilinių teisių gynybos sistemoje. Autorius prieina išvadą, kad Lietuvos Respublikos civiliniame kodekse savigyna įtvirtinta kaip viena iš neteisminių civilinių teisių gynybos formų. Magistrantas analizuoja savigynos sąvokos ir turinio probleminius aspektus. Atsižvelgdamas į tai, kaip savigyna Lietuvoje buvo suprantama Statutų galiojimo ir vėlesniais laikais, ir remdamasis savigynos samprata kitų valstybių civiliniuose įstatymuose, jis konstatuoja, kad Lietuvos Respublikos civiliniame kodekse savigynos samprata yra nepagrįstai susiaurinta. Remiantis atliktu tyrimu, siūloma keisti kai kurias savigyną reglamentuojančias teisės normas. Darbe pateikiama savigynos būdų samprata. Plačiau analizuojamas vienas iš jų – daikto sulaikymas. Magistro darbo autorius atkreipia dėmesį į tai, kad, taikant daikto sulaikymo teisę reglamentuojančias normas praktiškai gali kilti tam... [to full text] / Presented work analyses the institute of the defence of civil rights – self-defence. It has been known in Lithuania for a very long time. Self-defence was forbidden when Lithuania was occupied by the Soviet Union. As this institute only appeared in the modern civil law in Lithuania together with the new Civil Code, it has not yet been analyzed by Lithuanian law theoreticians in more detail. Practice of courts applying legal norms which regulate self-defence is also limited. All the above mentioned reasons have influenced the author’s decision to analyze civil-defense in the Lithuanian civil law in greater detail.

No description available.

This diploma thesis deals with necessity and self-defence in the light of the large recodification of private law in the Czech Republic. Together with other legal concepts they are referred to as the circumstances excluding unlawfulness. Their specificity lies in their exclusion of the obligation to compensate suffered damage provided that the conditions laid down by the law are met. This issue has always been a matter of interest to both laical and professional public as these important legal concepts form one of the most fundamental pillars of the liability system. The aim of the thesis is to point out their importance for the present codification by a comprehensive analysis of relevant legislation, conclusions of theory and case law. They have been subjected to extensive analysis as well as their Roman law roots. The key part is the comparison between Czech and German law that exceed the terms of private law. Due to their apparent connection the issue of criminal law was also included. In addition, this thesis deals with the institute of self-help in terms of its relationship with necessity and self-defence. Self-help was a typical means of protection in archaic societies but today's advanced society delegated the function of legal protection to the state by establishing independent and...

The purpose of this thesis to to investigate if the complex and ambiguous means of a hybrid warfare strategy in the context of the ‘armed attack’ threshold. The ‘armed attack’ threshold sits within the UN Charter article 51 and it constitutes the legal provision that the right to self-defence, both unilaterally and collectively, is only triggered in the event of an ‘armed attack’. It is therefore important to determine if this threshold can through the ambiguous and complex structure of hybrid warfare be circumvented or obfuscated to prevent, delay or weaken a State’s ability to act in self- defence or by other means. To examine this problem, this thesis approached it by describing the concept of hybrid warfare and the legal framework that constitute the ‘armed attack’ notion in the context of self-defence. And by, to the extent possible analysed if the hybrid warfare means; cyber warfare, information warfare and the use or support of proxy forces could individually amount to an ‘armed attack’ by viewing how these means were used in Ukraine by Russia. This thesis argues, that a hybrid adversary can through the inherently complex and ambiguous nature of hybrid warfare and its means, obfuscate its attribution under certain circumstance to prevent, limit or delay the ability of a State to act in self-defence or by other means.

No description available.

No description available.

No / The dichotomy between prohibitive law and moral responsibility is at the centre of debates about the legitimacy of humanitarian intervention. However, political interests remain an important factor not only in determining and tempering the humanitarian impulses of states, but also for gauging their more general adherence to the rule of law. The humanitarian intervention debate only has meaning in a context in which there is general, routine adherence to the non-interventionist norm of the international system, codified as Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. The `Bush Doctrine¿ of pre-emptive self-defence alters the political and politico-legal context that has until now given the humanitarian intervention debate its meaning and importance. Given this, together with a more general loosening of the strictures prohibiting or limiting the use of force, there is good cause for concern about the foundations of the post-1945 international order. The debate about humanitarian intervention can no longer abstract the tension between law and morality from a political arena that is facing such profound challenges.

No description available.