{"?xml":{"@version":"1.0"},"edm:RDF":{"@xmlns:dc":"http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/","@xmlns:edm":"http://www.europeana.eu/schemas/edm/","@xmlns:wgs84_pos":"http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos","@xmlns:foaf":"http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/","@xmlns:rdaGr2":"http://rdvocab.info/ElementsGr2","@xmlns:oai":"http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/","@xmlns:owl":"http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#","@xmlns:rdf":"http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#","@xmlns:ore":"http://www.openarchives.org/ore/terms/","@xmlns:skos":"http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#","@xmlns:dcterms":"http://purl.org/dc/terms/","edm:WebResource":[{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3PI35K40/b08bf7f8-1979-48cb-a6f0-49e2f76c08e8/PDF","dcterms:extent":"226 KB"},{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3PI35K40/2630b64e-4909-4866-94b0-4d828590fc31/TEXT","dcterms:extent":"77 KB"}],"edm:TimeSpan":{"@rdf:about":"2013-2026","edm:begin":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"2013"},"edm:end":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"2026"}},"edm:ProvidedCHO":{"@rdf:about":"URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3PI35K40","dcterms:isPartOf":[{"@rdf:resource":"https://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:spr-2XUGOISV"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Podjetje in delo"}],"dcterms:issued":"2026","dc:creator":"Možina, Damjan","dc:format":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"številka:1"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"letnik:52"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"str. 3-29"}],"dc:identifier":["ISSN:0353-6521","COBISSID_HOST:271066371","URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-3PI35K40"],"dc:language":"sl","dc:publisher":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Gospodarski vestnik"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Inštitut za delo pri Pravni fakulteti"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Zveza Društev pravnikov v gospodarstvu Slovenije"}],"dc:subject":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"domneva krivde"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"fault"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"krivda"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"law of non-contractual liability"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"nepogodbeno odškodninsko pravo"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"presumption of fault"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"protipravnost"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"wrongfulness"}],"dcterms:temporal":{"@rdf:resource":"2013-2026"},"dc:title":{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Razvoj in struktura krivdnega načela v slovenskem nepogodbenem odškodninskem pravu|"},"dc:description":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"The paper aims to illuminate the concepts of fault and wrongfulness within the general rule of non-contractual liability set out in Article 131(1) of the Slovenian Obligations Code (2002). The regulation is almost identical as the Yugoslav Law on Obligations of 1978. The analysis begins with an examination of the foundational draft - Mihailo Konstantinović’s Sketch for a Code of Obligations and Contracts (1969) - followed by a review of the modifications introduced during the legislative process that led to the final enactment of the Yugoslav law. Particular attention is devoted to the introduction of the reversed burden of proof regarding fault, a feature the Yugoslav legislator adopted under the influence of Soviet law. In Konstantinović’s original Sketch, the general rule followed the traditional French model, in which wrongfulness was integrated into the notion of fault. However, after the Yugoslav law was adopted, a different approach prevailed: as a distinct and independent element for fault-based liability, conceptual framework influenced by German and Austrian law. The burden of proving wrongfulness rests on the claimant. Despite the inclusion of this reversed burden of proof (presumption of fault), its practical impact remained relatively limited. The overall system stayed rooted in the classic framework of subjective, fault-based non-contractual liability"},{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"Prispevek osvetljuje predpostavki krivde in protipravnosti v splošnem pravilu nepogodbene odškodninske odgovornosti v prvem odstavku 131. člena Obligacijskega zakonika (2002). Ureditev je skoraj v celoti enaka tisti iz jugoslovanskega Zakona o obligacijskih razmerjih (1978). Najprej je predstavljena ureditev v osnutku ZOR, t. i. Skici Mihajla Konstantinovića (1969), nato pa spremembe, ki jih je osnutek doživel med oblikovanjem končnega besedila ZOR. Posebna pozornost je namenjena obrnjenemu dokaznemu bremenu, ki ga je jugoslovanski zakonodajalec po vzoru prava nekdanje Sovjetske zveze vključil v zakon. Medtem ko je Skica temeljila na generalni klavzuli in konceptu krivde francoskega tipa (protipravnost vključena v krivdo), se je na podlagi ZOR uveljavil drugačen koncept krivde, pri tem pa se je uveljavila oziroma ohranila protipravnost kot samostojna predpostavka krivdne odgovornosti, ki jo dokazuje tožeča stranka, kar konceptualno prihaja iz nemškega in avstrijskega prava. Vpliv obrnjenega dokaznega bremena je ostal obroben, ureditev pa ostaja v okvirih klasične krivdne (subjektivne) nepogodbene odškodninske odgovornosti"}],"edm:type":"TEXT","dc:type":[{"@xml:lang":"sl","#text":"znanstveno časopisje"},{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"journals"},{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q361785"}]},"ore:Aggregation":{"@rdf:about":"http://www.dlib.si/?URN=URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3PI35K40","edm:aggregatedCHO":{"@rdf:resource":"URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3PI35K40"},"edm:isShownBy":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3PI35K40/b08bf7f8-1979-48cb-a6f0-49e2f76c08e8/PDF"},"edm:rights":{"@rdf:resource":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"},"edm:provider":"Slovenian National E-content Aggregator","edm:dataProvider":{"@xml:lang":"en","#text":"National and University Library of Slovenia"},"edm:object":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/streamdb/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3PI35K40/maxi/edm"},"edm:isShownAt":{"@rdf:resource":"http://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3PI35K40"}}}}