LIABILITY OF A COURT ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND THE STATE TREASURY FOR DAMAGE CAUSED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF A COURT ENFORCEMENT OFFICER DUTIES
LIABILITY OF A COURT ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND THE STATE TREASURY FOR DAMAGE CAUSED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF A COURT ENFORCEMENT OFFICER DUTIES

Summary/Abstract: The purpose of this article is to clarify doubts surrounding the liability of the court enforcementofficer and the State Treasury for damages under Article 36 of the Act on Court EnforcementOfficers. It considers the constitutional model of liability for damages caused by unlawfulactions of a public authority, as well as civil law regulations concerning the general rules forcompensating damage. The conclusions drawn from the discussion in this article include, interalia, the following findings: (i) Article 36 CEOA provides an independent basis for the tortliability of a court enforcement officer, premised on the unlawfulness of the court enforcementofficer’s conduct, regardless of fault; (ii) damage subject to compensation under Article 36CEOA includes any damage to the legally protected goods of the affected entity, encompassingboth material and non-material damage (i.e., compensation for harm suffered); (iii) in relationto this liability, a narrow interpretation of unlawfulness should be applied, one that referencesthe constitutional approach to the sources of law (Articles 87–94 of the Constitution).

• Details
• Contents