The implications of section 24b [1] of the Danish Liability and Compensation Act

GonĂ¼l Ozden

Student thesis: Master thesis

Abstract

The topic of this thesis concerns the liability of injurers with mental illnesses or disabilities as it is defined in section 24b [1] of the Danish Liability and Compensation Act. It is followed by the main rule of the provision that there are no differences in determining the negligence of the group that is defined in the provision. It is on the basis of the legal analysis found that he possibility of reduction and extinction of the liability pursuant to the second rule of the provision, is very limited. The explanation for this could be found in the presence of section 19 [1] of the same Act, that provides extinction of liability in the presence of property insurance. According to the applied model of accidents and liability which entails the goal of minimizing total social costs, the negligence rule would provide that the incentives of injurers would be induced such that he will take a level of care that would result in this goal being achieved. This would also be the case if the injurers had a high cost of care, and it was not possible for courts to determine their level of care. This is however provided that all the assumptions of the model are present, mainly the rationality assumption. It is stadet in several places in the legislative work of the Act and the provision that the goal of the provision includes the prevention of accidents, which also was included in the goal of the economic model that is applied in the economic analysis. It is however also indicated that this might not be as extensive in the area that the provision covers. There is however, stadet other goals concerning provisions that provide the reduction and extinction possibility. They are founded on a number of needs of the injurers and are expresses to have social and humanitarian reasons. These goals are more likely to be achieved when considering the abilities of the type of injurers covered by the provision. Compared to the goal of the liability, because the possibility of inducing the incentives of this type of injurers, can be considered to be limited, because of the uncertainty about rationality assumption.

EducationsMSc in Commercial Law, (Graduate Programme) Final Thesis
LanguageEnglish
Publication date2018
Number of pages79
SupervisorsPatrik Lindskoug & Orsola Garofalo