The regulation of liability of the state and hunting organisations (hunting clubs) for damages caused by wild animals is complex and dynamic, just as the subject it governs - wild animals - which are inherently dynamic. Modern legislation has regulated the matter in two more or less separate acts. The liability for damages caused by game is regulated by the Game and Hunting Act, while the liability for damages caused by protected species is laid down in the Nature Conservation Act. Game and Hunting Act foresees different types of liability, as well as different holders of liability, depending on the area (on) to which the damage occurs, diving the liability among the hunting ground manager, that may be liable either culpably or strictly, and the state, whose liability is set out as strict and subsidiary. Liability in the event of a collision between game and a vehicle is also a subject of the regulation. Liability for damages caused by protected animals is regulated by the Nature Conversation Act in the form of a state compensation scheme. Such form of liability is characterised by the state's own undertaking to compensate the injured parties for a certain loss, whereby unlawful conduct and the other elements of classical liability for damages cannot be established. The regulation based on the aforementioned acts is, due to its nomotechnical vagueness, largely shaped by the courts. Thus, it could be stated that the aforementioned regulation is, to a large extent, "case law". The stated vagueness raises a number of issues, including the definition of the basic principles, such as the form of liability, its basis, and the extent and type of damages to be recognised. Additionally, the questions arise whether the present regulation is appropriate in terms of (equal) protection of the injured party under both laws, as well as in terms of the ability of hunting organisations to adequately control their risk of damage.
|
