This paper presents and critically analyses the case law of the Slovenian courts with regard to mass individual claims against the state due to nuisance from public roads and railroads. The courts have largely upheld these claims. In awarding monetary compensation for non-pecuniary loss, they have considered the fundamental right to a healthy environment to be a personality right. Moreover, they have held that the state is under a guarantee-like obligation towards the population in that noise arising from public roads and railways will not exceed the limit levels set by the Regulation on Limit Values of Environmental Noise Indicators. As a consequence, new mass claims are being filed, exposing the state to considerable liability. The author considers the approach taken by the civil courts in Slovenia to be misguided on several levels. A fair balance between should be sought public and individual interests. Upholding claims in full by individuals who did nothing to mitigate noise is inappropriate. The problem would be better dealt with by way of regulating noise protection; compensation by way of analogy to (partial) expropriation in the public interest should only be sought if noise protection measures are ineffective or disproportionate.

中文翻译：

---

斯洛文尼亚的道路交通妨害：国家对非金钱损害的责任

本文介绍并批判性地分析了斯洛文尼亚法院关于因公共道路和铁路造成的滋扰而对国家提出大规模个人索赔的判例法。法院在很大程度上支持了这些主张。在对非金钱损失给予金钱赔偿时，他们将健康环境的基本权利视为人格权。此外，他们认为国家对人民负有类似保证的义务，即公共道路和铁路产生的噪声不会超过《环境噪声指标限值条例》规定的限值。结果，正在提出新的大规模索赔，使国家承担相当大的责任。提交人认为斯洛文尼亚民事法院采取的方法在几个层面上都被误导了。应寻求公共利益和个人利益之间的公平平衡。没有采取任何措施减轻噪音的个人完全支持索赔是不合适的。这个问题最好通过调节噪音保护的方式来解决；只有在噪音保护措施无效或不相称的情况下，才应寻求通过类比为公共利益（部分）征用的方式进行补偿。