Povzetek: Prispevek opisuje ureditev objektivne odgovornosti za okoljske oziroma poplavne škode v Avstriji in v Sloveniji na primerih obratovanja vodnih elektrarn. V Avstriji ni zakona, ki bi - tako kot v Sloveniji - na splošno uredil objektivno odgovornost, pač pa se to ureja v različnih zakonih za posebna področja, tako na primer tudi v par. 364a ABGB, po katerem lahko lastnik sosednje nepremičnine od upravljavca hidroelektrarne zahteva odškodnino za škodo na nepremičnini. Predmet tega prispevka je zato tudi primerjalnopravni pogled na ureditev in sodno prakso v obeh državah. V času podnebnih sprememb je narasla nevarnost presenetljivih in katastrofalnih nalivov, kar zahteva posebno previdnost glede obratovanja vodnih elektrarn in jezov, da ne pride do podvajanja katastrofalnih poplav zaradi hkratnih izpustov voda iz jezov. Upravljavci vodnih elektrarn se z vidika objektivne odgovornosti ne morejo zlahka znebiti jamstva za škode, celo če so upoštevali vse predpise. Na drugi strani pa objektivna odgovornost ne pomeni, da upravljavci vodnih elektrarn odgovarjajo za poplavne škode tudi v primeru dokazane "višje sile". Razbremenilni dokaz, da gre za višjo silo, pa je dokaj zahteven spričo nevarnosti, ki jo predstavljajo veliki jezovi. Zato je objektivna odgovornost dejstvo, s katerim morajo računati upravljavci vodnih elektrarn v obeh državah. V sodni praksi obeh držav pa le težko najdemo sodbe, ki bi upravljavcem hidroelektrarn nalagale plačilo odškodnin zaradi (sočasnega) praznjenja jezov ob poplavah.
Ključne besede: vodna elektrarna, objektivna odgovornost, solidarno jamstvo, dokazno breme, okoljske škode, poplave, nevarne stvari, nevarne dejavnosti
Title: Liability of Hydroelectric Plants for Pollution/Flood Damage
Abstract: The main aspect of the author´s contribution is the question of "objective responsibility" of (hydroelectric) power plants regarding pollution/flood damage according to Austrian legislation and Slovenian legislation. In Austria, there is no general regulation of "objective responsibility": however, it can be found in special laws, for instance in Article 364a ABGB, by which the owner of a neighbouring property is entitled to claim damages from an operator of a regularly operating facility. In Slovenia, the legislation provides a general attitude for "objective responsibility" in Article 149 of the Obligations Code (OZ) instead. Therefore, legal comparison of legislation and legal practice in Austria and in Slovenia is a matter of the author´s professional article as well. In time of climate change, the hazard of heavy rainfalls, which may cause sudden big floods and endanger dams, rises permanently. Hydroelectric plants are not only obliged to take prompt maximal care of its impoundments and dams in order to avoid a "doubling" or an additional rise of "high waters", but to prevent additional damage especially during unavoidable "natural flood". In view of the "objective responsibility" in operating the dams, big hydroelectric plants can not easily avoid liability for damage, except in the proven case of "force majeure". But "force majeure" is hard to prove as the hazard of extreme weather and rainfall that leads to sudden flood have made the regulation of water reservoir lakes more and more risky and awkward to handle. Even without any fault of the dam operator, such hazard can lead to big (additional) damages due to emptying measures and is therefore a typical condition for "objective responsibility" of plant operators. In practice, however, court decisions condemning plant operators for "contributional flooding" remain an infrequent event in both states.
Keywords: hydroelectric power plant, objective responsibility, joint liability, burden of proof, environmental damage, flood, hazard
