Contenido

Surge cuando el daño, agravio u otro daño o perjuicio causado no tiene su origen en una relación contractual, sino en cualquier otro tipo de actividad.

La responsabilidad extracontractual, delictual o aquiliana puede definirse como aquella que existe cuando una persona causa, ya sea por sí misma, por medio de otra de la que responde o por una cosa de su propiedad o que posee, un daño a otra persona respecto de la cual no estaba ligada por un vínculo obligatorio anterior relacionado con el daño producido. Esta área del derecho civil también se conoce como delitos y cuasidelitos civiles (fuentes de las obligaciones). Las fuentes principales de las obligaciones extracontractuales son el hecho ilícito") y la gestión de negocios.

Un caso de responsabilidad extracontractual es el que puede surgir por los daños y perjuicios "Daño (Derecho)") causados a terceros como consecuencia de actividades que crean riesgos a personas ajenas a las mismas, como la conducción de un automóvil o el desarrollo de una actividad industrial.

Otro supuesto es el de la responsabilidad por daños causados por bienes propios: cuando se desprende un elemento de un edificio y causa lesiones a quien pasa por debajo o cuando alguien sufre un accidente por el mal estado del suelo. También se es responsable por los daños y perjuicios "Daño (Derecho)") que originen los animales de los que se sea propietario.

La responsabilidad puede tener su origen en actos de otra persona, por la que debe responder un padre por los daños y perjuicios que cause su hijo menor de edad; un empresario por los que causen sus empleados; y un establecimiento educacional por los causados por sus alumnos.

Requirements of extracontractual liability

The extracontractual liability provided for in the relevant legal regulations (for example, articles 1708 et seq. of the Argentine Civil Code, 2314 et seq. of the Chilean Civil Code, 1902 of the Spanish Civil Code), understood as the obligation to repair the damage caused by both its own acts and those of others, requires the following assumptions:

When damages and losses caused by such failure arise from the breach of a contractual relationship, we are in the presence of what modern doctrine has called "accumulation of responsibilities"). damages and would give rise to a non-contractual obligation.

Liability acquires peculiar characteristics when the damage or harm is caused by the public administration.

Although as a general rule the administration incurs liability for its abnormal, irregular or illicit act (what is called in French-inspired regulations "lack of service")*), in certain countries (such as Spain) or under certain hypotheses it may also incur liability for its normal actions, without the need for there to have been any irregularity in the event that causes the damage.

In such cases, a more severe degree of responsibility is required than for individuals, and in many cases objective liability is reached, liability for damages caused without intent or fault.

In exceptional cases, the State may be responsible for damages caused by the creation of valid legal norms, including laws (responsibility of the legislative State), when they are harmful to some specific people, even if they seek a good for the generality of the recipients. This liability without fault is usually based on the notion of rupture of equality in the face of public charges.

The State may also be responsible for judicial errors, for accidents caused by the poor condition of the roads, etc.

The main objective of civil liability is to seek reparation, which consists of restoring the balance that existed between the assets of the perpetrator of the damage and the assets of the victim before suffering the damage. Civil liability has a preventive aspect, which leads citizens to act prudently to avoid compromising their responsibility; and a punitive aspect, of pecuniary penalty.

The preventive role can actually be discussed, since a system of responsibility based on subjective attribution factors does not favor prevention. Furthermore, liability systems that base their institutional form on damage caused and truly preventive systems are of a residual or subsidiary nature. Thus, some advocate that it is the harsh terms of objective liability systems that, based on a sanction that is difficult to excuse, really favor prevention (created risk).

It is important to distinguish civil liability from criminal liability, since the latter is intended to designate the person who must respond for damages or losses caused to society as a whole, not to a particular individual. At the same time, all these types of legal responsibility must be distinguished from moral responsibility, in which those responsible are not responsible for their actions before society, but rather before their own conscience.

For criminal liability, damages or losses have a social nature, since they are considered attacks against public order serious enough to be strongly condemned and considered infractions. Criminal sanctions have an essentially punitive and repressive function, and only seek prevention in an accessory manner (either through intimidation and deterrence, or through the rehabilitation of the guilty party, their re-education or their social reintegration).

Civil liability attempts to assure victims of reparation for the private damage that has been caused to them, and tries to put things in the state they were in before the damage and restore the balance that has disappeared between the members of the group. For these reasons, the sanction of civil liability is, in principle, compensatory and not repressive.

It is important to mention that both legal branches can coexist in the same event. That is, a custodial sentence may be applied, without prejudice to the civil liability that may arise from having incurred a lawful or illicit act.

Contenido

Surge cuando el daño, agravio u otro daño o perjuicio causado no tiene su origen en una relación contractual, sino en cualquier otro tipo de actividad.

La responsabilidad extracontractual, delictual o aquiliana puede definirse como aquella que existe cuando una persona causa, ya sea por sí misma, por medio de otra de la que responde o por una cosa de su propiedad o que posee, un daño a otra persona respecto de la cual no estaba ligada por un vínculo obligatorio anterior relacionado con el daño producido. Esta área del derecho civil también se conoce como delitos y cuasidelitos civiles (fuentes de las obligaciones). Las fuentes principales de las obligaciones extracontractuales son el hecho ilícito") y la gestión de negocios.

Un caso de responsabilidad extracontractual es el que puede surgir por los daños y perjuicios "Daño (Derecho)") causados a terceros como consecuencia de actividades que crean riesgos a personas ajenas a las mismas, como la conducción de un automóvil o el desarrollo de una actividad industrial.

Otro supuesto es el de la responsabilidad por daños causados por bienes propios: cuando se desprende un elemento de un edificio y causa lesiones a quien pasa por debajo o cuando alguien sufre un accidente por el mal estado del suelo. También se es responsable por los daños y perjuicios "Daño (Derecho)") que originen los animales de los que se sea propietario.

La responsabilidad puede tener su origen en actos de otra persona, por la que debe responder un padre por los daños y perjuicios que cause su hijo menor de edad; un empresario por los que causen sus empleados; y un establecimiento educacional por los causados por sus alumnos.

Requirements of extracontractual liability

The extracontractual liability provided for in the relevant legal regulations (for example, articles 1708 et seq. of the Argentine Civil Code, 2314 et seq. of the Chilean Civil Code, 1902 of the Spanish Civil Code), understood as the obligation to repair the damage caused by both its own acts and those of others, requires the following assumptions:

When damages and losses caused by such failure arise from the breach of a contractual relationship, we are in the presence of what modern doctrine has called "accumulation of responsibilities"). damages and would give rise to a non-contractual obligation.

Liability acquires peculiar characteristics when the damage or harm is caused by the public administration.

Although as a general rule the administration incurs liability for its abnormal, irregular or illicit act (what is called in French-inspired regulations "lack of service")*), in certain countries (such as Spain) or under certain hypotheses it may also incur liability for its normal actions, without the need for there to have been any irregularity in the event that causes the damage.

In such cases, a more severe degree of responsibility is required than for individuals, and in many cases objective liability is reached, liability for damages caused without intent or fault.

In exceptional cases, the State may be responsible for damages caused by the creation of valid legal norms, including laws (responsibility of the legislative State), when they are harmful to some specific people, even if they seek a good for the generality of the recipients. This liability without fault is usually based on the notion of rupture of equality in the face of public charges.

The State may also be responsible for judicial errors, for accidents caused by the poor condition of the roads, etc.

The main objective of civil liability is to seek reparation, which consists of restoring the balance that existed between the assets of the perpetrator of the damage and the assets of the victim before suffering the damage. Civil liability has a preventive aspect, which leads citizens to act prudently to avoid compromising their responsibility; and a punitive aspect, of pecuniary penalty.

The preventive role can actually be discussed, since a system of responsibility based on subjective attribution factors does not favor prevention. Furthermore, liability systems that base their institutional form on damage caused and truly preventive systems are of a residual or subsidiary nature. Thus, some advocate that it is the harsh terms of objective liability systems that, based on a sanction that is difficult to excuse, really favor prevention (created risk).

It is important to distinguish civil liability from criminal liability, since the latter is intended to designate the person who must respond for damages or losses caused to society as a whole, not to a particular individual. At the same time, all these types of legal responsibility must be distinguished from moral responsibility, in which those responsible are not responsible for their actions before society, but rather before their own conscience.

For criminal liability, damages or losses have a social nature, since they are considered attacks against public order serious enough to be strongly condemned and considered infractions. Criminal sanctions have an essentially punitive and repressive function, and only seek prevention in an accessory manner (either through intimidation and deterrence, or through the rehabilitation of the guilty party, their re-education or their social reintegration).

Civil liability attempts to assure victims of reparation for the private damage that has been caused to them, and tries to put things in the state they were in before the damage and restore the balance that has disappeared between the members of the group. For these reasons, the sanction of civil liability is, in principle, compensatory and not repressive.

It is important to mention that both legal branches can coexist in the same event. That is, a custodial sentence may be applied, without prejudice to the civil liability that may arise from having incurred a lawful or illicit act.