Standard

Возмещение вреда, причиненного при эксплуатации здания: российский и китайский опыт правового регулирования. / Кратенко, Максим Владимирович; Erbakhaev, Evgeniy.

в: ВЕСТНИК САНКТ-ПЕТЕРБУРГСКОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА. ПРАВО, Том 12, № 2, 05.07.2021, стр. 455-476.

Результаты исследований: Научные публикации в периодических изданияхстатьяРецензирование

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

BibTeX

@article{e195be0abb9d4daf8b1779f0f5339a6e,
title = "Возмещение вреда, причиненного при эксплуатации здания: российский и китайский опыт правового регулирования",
abstract = "The article examines the problem of compensation for harm caused in the process of using a building and structure. Attention is paid to the side of the defendant in relation to apartment buildings and non-residential buildings, the distribution of liability in the case of a plurality of tortfeasors, the regulation of third-party liability issues by the contract. A comparative analy-sis of the legislation of the Russian Federation and the People{\textquoteright}s Republic of China regulating the liability of building{\textquoteright}s owners (users) and contractors involved in the maintenance of a building as well as court practice is conducted. The choice of the Chinese legal system is due to the presence of special rules in Tort Liability Law of China (2009). According to the results of the study, the authors have formulated a number of proposals, in particular: to unify the le-gal regime for residential and non-residential buildings for the purposes of compensation for harm caused to third parties; to differentiate the liability for harm caused by the destruction of a building (its structural components) and damage due to items falling out from the building (snow or ice falling from the roof, falling advertising designs, objects being thrown out of the building, etc.), to allow the contractual regulation of owner{\textquoteright}s liability provided that the victim is given the right to choose the defendant (the building{\textquoteright}s owner or the maintenance company, the contractor involved). The authors also argue in favor of a codified act as a source of tort law, which will ensure consistent regulation of the studied relations.",
keywords = "tort liability, building, structure, collapse, fallen object, maintenance company., maintenance company, building, collapse, structure, fallen object, tort liability, Building, Collapse, Fallen object, Maintenance company, Structure, Tort liability",
author = "Кратенко, {Максим Владимирович} and Evgeniy Erbakhaev",
year = "2021",
month = jul,
day = "5",
doi = "10.21638/spbu14.2021.213",
language = "русский",
volume = "12",
pages = "455--476",
journal = "ВЕСТНИК САНКТ-ПЕТЕРБУРГСКОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА. ПРАВО",
issn = "2074-1243",
publisher = "Издательство Санкт-Петербургского университета",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Возмещение вреда, причиненного при эксплуатации здания: российский и китайский опыт правового регулирования

AU - Кратенко, Максим Владимирович

AU - Erbakhaev, Evgeniy

PY - 2021/7/5

Y1 - 2021/7/5

N2 - The article examines the problem of compensation for harm caused in the process of using a building and structure. Attention is paid to the side of the defendant in relation to apartment buildings and non-residential buildings, the distribution of liability in the case of a plurality of tortfeasors, the regulation of third-party liability issues by the contract. A comparative analy-sis of the legislation of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China regulating the liability of building’s owners (users) and contractors involved in the maintenance of a building as well as court practice is conducted. The choice of the Chinese legal system is due to the presence of special rules in Tort Liability Law of China (2009). According to the results of the study, the authors have formulated a number of proposals, in particular: to unify the le-gal regime for residential and non-residential buildings for the purposes of compensation for harm caused to third parties; to differentiate the liability for harm caused by the destruction of a building (its structural components) and damage due to items falling out from the building (snow or ice falling from the roof, falling advertising designs, objects being thrown out of the building, etc.), to allow the contractual regulation of owner’s liability provided that the victim is given the right to choose the defendant (the building’s owner or the maintenance company, the contractor involved). The authors also argue in favor of a codified act as a source of tort law, which will ensure consistent regulation of the studied relations.

AB - The article examines the problem of compensation for harm caused in the process of using a building and structure. Attention is paid to the side of the defendant in relation to apartment buildings and non-residential buildings, the distribution of liability in the case of a plurality of tortfeasors, the regulation of third-party liability issues by the contract. A comparative analy-sis of the legislation of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China regulating the liability of building’s owners (users) and contractors involved in the maintenance of a building as well as court practice is conducted. The choice of the Chinese legal system is due to the presence of special rules in Tort Liability Law of China (2009). According to the results of the study, the authors have formulated a number of proposals, in particular: to unify the le-gal regime for residential and non-residential buildings for the purposes of compensation for harm caused to third parties; to differentiate the liability for harm caused by the destruction of a building (its structural components) and damage due to items falling out from the building (snow or ice falling from the roof, falling advertising designs, objects being thrown out of the building, etc.), to allow the contractual regulation of owner’s liability provided that the victim is given the right to choose the defendant (the building’s owner or the maintenance company, the contractor involved). The authors also argue in favor of a codified act as a source of tort law, which will ensure consistent regulation of the studied relations.

KW - tort liability, building, structure, collapse, fallen object, maintenance company.

KW - maintenance company

KW - building

KW - collapse

KW - structure

KW - fallen object

KW - tort liability

KW - Building

KW - Collapse

KW - Fallen object

KW - Maintenance company

KW - Structure

KW - Tort liability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85113616508&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/43e59f85-7d6b-3ea8-861f-9e0562cd50e8/

U2 - 10.21638/spbu14.2021.213

DO - 10.21638/spbu14.2021.213

M3 - статья

VL - 12

SP - 455

EP - 476

JO - ВЕСТНИК САНКТ-ПЕТЕРБУРГСКОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА. ПРАВО

JF - ВЕСТНИК САНКТ-ПЕТЕРБУРГСКОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА. ПРАВО

SN - 2074-1243

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 85211107