In criminal law, the notion of negligence requires »greater guilt« than negligence in civil law. In order to fulfill the conditions for negligence according to criminal law, a serious violation of duty of care must occur. The duty of care standards in criminal law oftentimes depend on the consciousness of the judge in each particular case, since it is very difficult to determine what where the considerations, if there even were any, in the perpetrator’s consciousness. At the same time, we are dealing with a particularly grave consequence – the death of human being that is nevertheless one of the most important values that our legal system protects. However, this does not imply an automatic attribution of guilt to the perpetrator; therefore, the justification of liability must be carefully considered, corroborated by relevant arguments, and carefully formulated.
When it comes to negligence, we can determine a situation in which the perpetrator did not even think about the undesired result (unconscious negligence), and a situation in which the perpetrator considered the possible outcome; however, he mistakenly hoped that this outcome would not occur (conscious negligence). Where are the limits of possible allegations of the offender of negligent homicide? The level of subjective contribution of the judge in the borderline cases and the limits of objective criteria in the judgement of negligence is a matter of theory, as well as established law practice.