| Abstract [eng] |
The master's thesis analyzes the issue of exceeding the limits of self-defense, aiming to comprehensively examine how this matter is regulated in national legal regulations, criminal law doctrine, and national court practices. The thesis analyzes whether the practice regarding the assessment of the conditions for exceeding the limits of self-defense is consistent and assesses whether the provisions formed in the doctrine are reflected in the latest court practice. From both a theoretical and practical perspective, the thesis explores the concept of self-defense and the conditions for its legality, including the danger, obviousness, reality of the threat, and the requirements for self-defense. It discusses the content and evaluation of these conditions. The paper reveals the essential criteria for exceeding the limits of self-defense, such as the form of direct intent in the defender’s actions, serious harm to health or death, and the clear mismatch between the defense and the nature and danger of the threat, and their assessment in case law. The thesis further examines how these criteria are evaluated in court practice when deciding whether the limits of self-defense have been exceeded. By analyzing the latest case law of the Supreme Court of Lithuania and the Court of Appeals of Lithuania, the paper identifies the situations in which a person is most often deemed to have exceeded the limits of self-defense when protecting themselves or others, property, the inviolability of the home, other rights, or public or state interests from an initiated or directly impending dangerous threat. The study also highlights the practical challenges observed in such cases. Based on legal regulations, criminal law doctrine, and judicial practice, the thesis reveals the situations in which it is not considered that the limits of self-defense have been exceeded. |
