Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe
Liability of railway carrier for delay in delivery of goods
Apstrakt
U članku se razmatra odgovornost železničkog prevozioca za zakašnjenje u isporuci robe. Ova odgovornost postaje naročito aktuelna imajući u vidu novi pravni okvir železničkog prava koji nastaje promenom sistemskih zakona u ovoj oblasti. Iako na prvi pogled odgovornost prevozioca za zakašnjenje ostaje istovetna onoj koja je postojala po prethodnom istovrsnom zakonu (iz 1995. godine), ona se unekoliko menja činjenicom razdvajanja upravljačke od prevozničke funkcije u Železnicama Srbije. Naime, upravo je jedan od razloga usvajanja novog pravnog okvira u ovoj oblasti bilo usklađivanje sa međunarodnim tendencijama otvaranja železničkog prevoza tržištu, tj. omogućavanjem postojanja više različitih prevozilaca u jednoj zemlji. Uskladivši se sa Viljnuskim protokolom iz 1999. godine, srpsko železničko pravo se suočava sa novim problemom kod odgovornosti za zakašnjenje, u okviru koje prevozilac odgovara i ako je do prekoračenja roka isporuke došlo usled radnji/propusta upravljača železničke infr...astrukture. U radu se iznose zaključci koji ovakav pravni režim čine neosnovanim i nedopustivim, a posebno imajući u vidu da upravljač infrastrukture ne može da bude lice kojim se prevozilac prilikom obavljanja svoje delatnosti služi, s obzirom da ga ne može birati, niti davati uputstva i kontrolisati. Zbog toga, predlaže se svojevrsni sistem 'mreže' u okviru koga će svaki subjekt odgovarati za propuste u delu svoje nadležnosti, što bi kao posledici vodilo tome da železnički prevozilac ne može da odgovara za propuste koje je učinio upravljač infrastrukture. U prvom delu rada, autor razmatra novi pravni okvir u oblasti železničkog saobraćaja, osvrćući se na statusnu promenu koju je izvršila Železnica Srbije usklađujući se sa novim propisima. U drugom, centralnom, delu rada određuje se pojam zakašnjenja, različite vrste rokova koje čine jedinstveni rok isporuke, kao i vrste šteta koje mogu da nastanu usled zkašnjenja. Na kraju, u trećem delu, autor iznosi zaključak zalažući se za ideju neodgovornosti prevozioca za zakašnjenje koje nastaje isključivo zbog grešaka upravljača infrastrukture.
In this article, the author initially, in introductory note, explains a new legal regime in Serbian railway law. It is consisted of three new laws which brought about division of Serbian railway, as one unit, one company, into four separated companies, from which is especially important separation of infrastructure management function from function of carriage. In combination with new Serbian railway legal regime it causes the biggest problem in liability of carrier for delay, because it makes responsible carrier for fault and mistakes of manager of railway's infrastructure, despite of impossibility of carrier to control or make directive to manager of infrastructure. Actually, on this way, the carrier is imposed with a duty of manager of infrastructure to perform timetable and other organizational function in railway network. This legal solution seems unfairly due to carrier neither can choose nor control manager of infrastructure in its operation and from that reason the author propo...ses new solution which would lead to separation of liability of involved legal persons in railway traffic according to network principle. Network principle, by the way, makes responsible only those in whose part of route (time, way) damage occurred. Consequently, this would make railway carrier responsible only for operation of carriage, but not for above mentioned function of making schedule which is dominantly function of manager of railway infrastructure. In the second and central part of the article, the author explains and specifies what is actually meant by the term of delay, what types of exceeding the referent time exist and, finally, what sort of damages could arise from exceeding the delivery time (especially regarding to commercial and real damage on goods). It is concluded that carrier, in case of delay, should be compensated only with commercial but not real damages on goods, because of existence of different criteria of limiting these damages.
Ključne reči:
železnički prevozilac / zakašnjenje / upravljač infrastrukture / ograničena odgovornost za štetu / naknada štete / manager of infrastructure / limitation of damage / liability of railway carrier / exceeding of time delivery / delayIzvor:
Pravo i privreda, 2016, 54, 7-9, 112-128Izdavač:
- Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
Institucija/grupa
Pravni fakultet / Faculty of Law University of BelgradeTY - JOUR AU - Janković, Svetislav PY - 2016 UR - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/937 AB - U članku se razmatra odgovornost železničkog prevozioca za zakašnjenje u isporuci robe. Ova odgovornost postaje naročito aktuelna imajući u vidu novi pravni okvir železničkog prava koji nastaje promenom sistemskih zakona u ovoj oblasti. Iako na prvi pogled odgovornost prevozioca za zakašnjenje ostaje istovetna onoj koja je postojala po prethodnom istovrsnom zakonu (iz 1995. godine), ona se unekoliko menja činjenicom razdvajanja upravljačke od prevozničke funkcije u Železnicama Srbije. Naime, upravo je jedan od razloga usvajanja novog pravnog okvira u ovoj oblasti bilo usklađivanje sa međunarodnim tendencijama otvaranja železničkog prevoza tržištu, tj. omogućavanjem postojanja više različitih prevozilaca u jednoj zemlji. Uskladivši se sa Viljnuskim protokolom iz 1999. godine, srpsko železničko pravo se suočava sa novim problemom kod odgovornosti za zakašnjenje, u okviru koje prevozilac odgovara i ako je do prekoračenja roka isporuke došlo usled radnji/propusta upravljača železničke infrastrukture. U radu se iznose zaključci koji ovakav pravni režim čine neosnovanim i nedopustivim, a posebno imajući u vidu da upravljač infrastrukture ne može da bude lice kojim se prevozilac prilikom obavljanja svoje delatnosti služi, s obzirom da ga ne može birati, niti davati uputstva i kontrolisati. Zbog toga, predlaže se svojevrsni sistem 'mreže' u okviru koga će svaki subjekt odgovarati za propuste u delu svoje nadležnosti, što bi kao posledici vodilo tome da železnički prevozilac ne može da odgovara za propuste koje je učinio upravljač infrastrukture. U prvom delu rada, autor razmatra novi pravni okvir u oblasti železničkog saobraćaja, osvrćući se na statusnu promenu koju je izvršila Železnica Srbije usklađujući se sa novim propisima. U drugom, centralnom, delu rada određuje se pojam zakašnjenja, različite vrste rokova koje čine jedinstveni rok isporuke, kao i vrste šteta koje mogu da nastanu usled zkašnjenja. Na kraju, u trećem delu, autor iznosi zaključak zalažući se za ideju neodgovornosti prevozioca za zakašnjenje koje nastaje isključivo zbog grešaka upravljača infrastrukture. AB - In this article, the author initially, in introductory note, explains a new legal regime in Serbian railway law. It is consisted of three new laws which brought about division of Serbian railway, as one unit, one company, into four separated companies, from which is especially important separation of infrastructure management function from function of carriage. In combination with new Serbian railway legal regime it causes the biggest problem in liability of carrier for delay, because it makes responsible carrier for fault and mistakes of manager of railway's infrastructure, despite of impossibility of carrier to control or make directive to manager of infrastructure. Actually, on this way, the carrier is imposed with a duty of manager of infrastructure to perform timetable and other organizational function in railway network. This legal solution seems unfairly due to carrier neither can choose nor control manager of infrastructure in its operation and from that reason the author proposes new solution which would lead to separation of liability of involved legal persons in railway traffic according to network principle. Network principle, by the way, makes responsible only those in whose part of route (time, way) damage occurred. Consequently, this would make railway carrier responsible only for operation of carriage, but not for above mentioned function of making schedule which is dominantly function of manager of railway infrastructure. In the second and central part of the article, the author explains and specifies what is actually meant by the term of delay, what types of exceeding the referent time exist and, finally, what sort of damages could arise from exceeding the delivery time (especially regarding to commercial and real damage on goods). It is concluded that carrier, in case of delay, should be compensated only with commercial but not real damages on goods, because of existence of different criteria of limiting these damages. PB - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd T2 - Pravo i privreda T1 - Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe T1 - Liability of railway carrier for delay in delivery of goods EP - 128 IS - 7-9 SP - 112 VL - 54 UR - conv_2183 ER -
@article{ author = "Janković, Svetislav", year = "2016", abstract = "U članku se razmatra odgovornost železničkog prevozioca za zakašnjenje u isporuci robe. Ova odgovornost postaje naročito aktuelna imajući u vidu novi pravni okvir železničkog prava koji nastaje promenom sistemskih zakona u ovoj oblasti. Iako na prvi pogled odgovornost prevozioca za zakašnjenje ostaje istovetna onoj koja je postojala po prethodnom istovrsnom zakonu (iz 1995. godine), ona se unekoliko menja činjenicom razdvajanja upravljačke od prevozničke funkcije u Železnicama Srbije. Naime, upravo je jedan od razloga usvajanja novog pravnog okvira u ovoj oblasti bilo usklađivanje sa međunarodnim tendencijama otvaranja železničkog prevoza tržištu, tj. omogućavanjem postojanja više različitih prevozilaca u jednoj zemlji. Uskladivši se sa Viljnuskim protokolom iz 1999. godine, srpsko železničko pravo se suočava sa novim problemom kod odgovornosti za zakašnjenje, u okviru koje prevozilac odgovara i ako je do prekoračenja roka isporuke došlo usled radnji/propusta upravljača železničke infrastrukture. U radu se iznose zaključci koji ovakav pravni režim čine neosnovanim i nedopustivim, a posebno imajući u vidu da upravljač infrastrukture ne može da bude lice kojim se prevozilac prilikom obavljanja svoje delatnosti služi, s obzirom da ga ne može birati, niti davati uputstva i kontrolisati. Zbog toga, predlaže se svojevrsni sistem 'mreže' u okviru koga će svaki subjekt odgovarati za propuste u delu svoje nadležnosti, što bi kao posledici vodilo tome da železnički prevozilac ne može da odgovara za propuste koje je učinio upravljač infrastrukture. U prvom delu rada, autor razmatra novi pravni okvir u oblasti železničkog saobraćaja, osvrćući se na statusnu promenu koju je izvršila Železnica Srbije usklađujući se sa novim propisima. U drugom, centralnom, delu rada određuje se pojam zakašnjenja, različite vrste rokova koje čine jedinstveni rok isporuke, kao i vrste šteta koje mogu da nastanu usled zkašnjenja. Na kraju, u trećem delu, autor iznosi zaključak zalažući se za ideju neodgovornosti prevozioca za zakašnjenje koje nastaje isključivo zbog grešaka upravljača infrastrukture., In this article, the author initially, in introductory note, explains a new legal regime in Serbian railway law. It is consisted of three new laws which brought about division of Serbian railway, as one unit, one company, into four separated companies, from which is especially important separation of infrastructure management function from function of carriage. In combination with new Serbian railway legal regime it causes the biggest problem in liability of carrier for delay, because it makes responsible carrier for fault and mistakes of manager of railway's infrastructure, despite of impossibility of carrier to control or make directive to manager of infrastructure. Actually, on this way, the carrier is imposed with a duty of manager of infrastructure to perform timetable and other organizational function in railway network. This legal solution seems unfairly due to carrier neither can choose nor control manager of infrastructure in its operation and from that reason the author proposes new solution which would lead to separation of liability of involved legal persons in railway traffic according to network principle. Network principle, by the way, makes responsible only those in whose part of route (time, way) damage occurred. Consequently, this would make railway carrier responsible only for operation of carriage, but not for above mentioned function of making schedule which is dominantly function of manager of railway infrastructure. In the second and central part of the article, the author explains and specifies what is actually meant by the term of delay, what types of exceeding the referent time exist and, finally, what sort of damages could arise from exceeding the delivery time (especially regarding to commercial and real damage on goods). It is concluded that carrier, in case of delay, should be compensated only with commercial but not real damages on goods, because of existence of different criteria of limiting these damages.", publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd", journal = "Pravo i privreda", title = "Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe, Liability of railway carrier for delay in delivery of goods", pages = "128-112", number = "7-9", volume = "54", url = "conv_2183" }
Janković, S.. (2016). Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe. in Pravo i privreda Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 54(7-9), 112-128. conv_2183
Janković S. Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe. in Pravo i privreda. 2016;54(7-9):112-128. conv_2183 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe" in Pravo i privreda, 54, no. 7-9 (2016):112-128, conv_2183 .