Separate Methodological Problems of the Evolution of Guilt in Civil Law

The paper notes that in ancient societies, the responsibility did not start with guilt, but rather with infliction of harm, when harm or losses were compensated to victims (creditors) only in connection with this infliction, the debtor’s mental attitude to his actions was not taken into account. Guilt as a mental attitude of the subject to their illegal action (inaction) and the ensuing consequences appeared in connection with the formation of an individualistic worldview in society. From this period on, responsibility begins to be based on the principles of guilt. There is a gradual overcoming of fundamentals of the infliction of harm. Subsequently, the ideas of individualism began to lose their appeal to society and the process of transition from individualism to collectivism began. In matters of responsibility this was reflected in the emergence of strict liability, when compensation for losses (harm) was carried out not in connection with the establishment of a certain mental attitude of the subject to their illegal behavior, but for the very fact of causing harm or losses. Currently, in the science of civil law, there is no longer that urgency in the discussion about the principles of responsibility: both the fundamentals of guilt and the fundamentals of infliction of harm are recognized by legislation and judicial practice. It can be argued that the fundamentals of infliction of harm will be recognized in even greater volumes. In particular, from such positions, apparently, it is necessary to resolve the issue of compensation for damage to the victim caused by an object controlled by artificial intelligence, it will not even be strict, as the responsibility of the owner of the source of increased danger, but general (absolute) liability for the very fact of causing harm.

1. Berman GJ. Zapadnaya traditsiya prava: epokha formirovaniya [The Western tradition of law: The epoch of formation]. Trans. from English, 2nd ed. Moscow; 1998. (In Russ.).

2. Bogdanov DE. Evolyutsiya grazhdansko-pravovoy otvetstvennosti s pozitsii spravedlivosti: sravnitelnopravovoy aspekt: monografiya. [Evolution of civil liability from the standpoint of justice: comparative legal aspect. A monograph]. Moscow: Prospekt Publ; 2015. (In Russ.).

3. Bogdanov EV. Idei individualizma, kollektivizma, kapitalizma v sovremennom grazhdanskom prave Rossii [Ideas of individualism, collectivism, capitalism in modern civil law of Russia]. Zhurnal Rossiyskogo Prava [Journal of Russian Law]. 2021;12:80-97. (In Russ.).

4. Bogdanov EV. Pravovoe polozhenie organa yuridicheskogo litsa [The legal status of the body of a legal entity]. Zhurnal Rossiyskogo Prava [Journal of Russian Law]. 2001;3:108-113. (In Russ.).

5. Bogdanov EV. Problema sushchnosti yuridicheskogo litsa [The problem of the essence of a legal entity]. Sovremennoe pravo [Modern law]. 2011;11:89-98. (In Russ.).

6. Bogdanova EE. Problemy retseptsii zarubezhnykh pravovykh norm i konstruktsiy v rossiyskom obyazatelstvennom prave [Problems of reception of foreign legal norms and constructions in the Russian law of obligations]. In: Bogdanova EE, editor. Reforma obyazatelstvennogo prava Rossii: problemy i perspektivy: monografiya [Reform of the law of obligations of Russia: Problems and prospects. A monograph]. Moscow: Prospect Publ.; 2018. (In Russ.).

7. Braginskiy MI, Vitryanskiy VV. Dogovornoe pravo: Obshchie polozheniya [Contract law: General provisions]. Moscow; 1998. (In Russ.).

8. Varkallo V. Ob otvetstvennosti po grazhdanskomu pravu (vozmeshchenie vreda — funktsii, vidy, granitsy) [On liability under civil law (compensation for damage — functions, types, boundaries)]. Trans. from Polish. An introductory article by Bratus SN. Moscow: Progress Publ.; 1978. (In Russ.).

9. Sukhanov EA, editor. Grazhdanskoe pravo: uchebnik: v 2 t. [Civil Law: A textbook. In 2 vols.]. Vol. 1. Moscow; 2000. (In Russ.).

10. Sheptulin AP, editor. Dialekticheskiy materializm: uchebnoe posobie [Dialectical materialism: A textbook]. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola Publ.; 1975. (In Russ.).

11. Muromtsev SA. Grazhdanskoe pravo Drevnego Rima [Civil law of Ancient Rome]. Moscow: Statut Publ.; 2003. (In Russ.).

12. Novitskiy IB. Izbrannye trudy po grazhdanskomu pravu: v 2 t. [Selected works on civil law: in 2 vols.]. Vol. 1. Moscow: Statut Publ.; 2006. (In Russ.).

13. Prokopiy kesariyskiy o slavyanakh i antakh, VI v. [Procopius of Caesarea on the Slavs and the Ants, 6th century]. In: Khrestomatiya po istorii Rossii: uchebnoe posobie [Anthology on the history of Russia: A study guide]. Moscow: Prospekt Publ.; 2012. (In Russ.).

14. Radbruch G. Filosofiya prava [Philosophy of Law]. Trans. from German. Moscow: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya Publ.; 2004. (In Russ.).

15. Novitskiy IB, Pereterskiy IS, editors. Rimskoe chastnoe pravo: uchebnik [Roman Private Law: A textbook]. Moscow: Yurist Publ.; 1997. (In Russ.).

16. Sinitsyn SA, Naiba SB. Pravovoe regulirovanie iskusstvennogo intellekta: sostoyanie i perspektivy [Legal regulation of artificial intelligence: State and prospects]. In: Kucherov II, Sinitsin SA, editors. Tsifrovaya ekonomika: aktualnye napravleniya pravovogo regulirovaniya: nauchno-prakticheskoe posobie [Digital economy: Current directions of legal regulation. A scientific and practical guidelines]. Moscow: Norma: IZiSP Publ.; 2022. (In Russ.).

17. Syrykh VM. Logicheskie osnovaniya obshchey teorii prava: v 2 t. [Logical foundations of the general theory of law: in 2 vol.]. Vol. 1. Elementnyy sostav [Elemental analysis]. 2nd ed. Moscow: Yustitsinform Publ.; 2004. (In Russ.).

18. Marchenko MN, editor. Filosofiya prava: kurs lektsiy: uchebnoe posobie: v 2 t. [Philosophy of Law: A course of lectures. A textbook in 2 vols.]. Vol. 1. Moscow: Prospekt Publ.; 2011. (In Russ.).

19. Filosofskiy entsiklopedicheskiy slovar [Philosophical encyclopaedic dictionary]. Moscow; 1989. (In Russ.).