Exclusion Of The Flagrant Necessity
(LUXJUS)
EXCLUSION OF the FLAGRANT NECESSITY Certain people, for being in charge of functions that, normally, place them in danger, cannot exempt themselves of the responsibility for the typical behavior that to practise in one of these situations. 1º of art foresees §. 24: ?It cannot allege flagrant necessity who had the legal duty to face the danger?. To have legal is that foreseeing in a rule of law (law, decree, regulation, etc.), what it includes the obligation functional of the policeman, the soldier, the fireman, the sanitarista doctor, the captain of ship or aircraft etc. will answer they for the practised crime to save proper right, even so gifts the requirements of the designated flagrant necessity already, will be facing the danger in result of legal disposal. SPECIFIC CASES In order any doubt in the application of the law to the facts that could generate divergences, foresees the code, in the special part, some specific cases of flagrant necessity the determined crimes, male defendant excluding the antilegality, however excluding the vagueness doctrine. EXCESS Exceeding the agent the behavior to preserve the legally protected interest, will answer for illicit criminal if it acted fraudulently or guiltily. It is cited for example, the agent who being able only to wound the victim, finishes for causing it to it death. PUTATIVE FLAGRANT NECESSITY putative will have flagrant necessity if the agent assumes, for error, that if finds in danger situation. Assuming the agent, for error fully justified by the circumstances, to be in the way of a fire, will not answer for the assault and batteries or death that to come to cause to save itself. The justification inexists, but the agent does not answer for the fact for absence of guilt in result of error of prohibition.
Resumos Relacionados
- Night Sin
- O Pequeno Príncipe
- Angels And Daemons
- Pride And Prejudice
- Inteligencia Emocional
|
|
