Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T07:04:30.877Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Day Fines in Denmark

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2021

Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko
Affiliation:
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
Michael Faure
Affiliation:
Universiteit Maastricht, Netherlands
Get access

Summary

Day fines were introduced in 1939 as an alternative to short-term custodial sentences and to punish rich and poor equally hard. Thus, the daily unit must be fixed according the average daily earnings of the offender (taking account of living conditions, capital resources, family responsibilities etc.). The number of day fines must be fixed between 1 and 60, having regard to the seriousness of the offence. Day fines can be applied for violations of the Criminal Code only in court (no administrative day fines). Thus, day fines are relatively rare compared to the total number of fines, but used for a broad range of violations of the Criminal Code, including negligent manslaughter and assault. The Danish experience shows that there is a risk of the system not being applied in accordance with its purpose. In some cases, judges calculate the fine by determining first the over-all amount of the fine and therefrom deduct the number of day fines and the daily unit. There is no research on the level of acceptance of day fines among the general population. It has been proposed to abolish the system, but there has not been much public criticism for the last 20 years.

Type
Chapter
Information
Day Fines in Europe
Assessing Income-Based Sanctions in Criminal Justice Systems
, pp. 70 - 84
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Balvig, F. 2010. Danskernes retsfølelse og retsfornuft – et forspil, Det Juridiske Fakultet, Københavns Universitet, p. 19. Available at: www.justitsministeriet.dk/sites/default/files/media/Arbejdsomraader/Forskning/Forskningspuljen/2011/2010/Retsbevidsthedsundersoegelsen_2010.pdf.Google Scholar
Betænkning afgiven af Straffelovskommissionen af 9 November 1917, København 1912.Google Scholar
Elholm, T. 2010. 8:11 om bøder og proportionalitet i specialstrafferetten. København: Jurist- og Økonomforbundets Forlag.Google Scholar
Elholm, T. 2014. ‘The Symbolic Purpose of Criminal Law’, in Reindl-Krauskopf, S., Zerbes, I., Brandstetter, W., Lewisch, P. and Tipold, A. (eds.), Festschrift für Helmut Fuchs.Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Greve, V., Straffene, 2002, pp. 147 et seq.Google Scholar
Kriminalitet 2017, Danmarks Statistik, Årgang 76, Marts 2019, p. 133. Available at: www.dst.dk/da/Statistik/Publikationer/VisPub?cid=28072.Google Scholar
Langsted, L. B., Garde, P., Greve, V. and Elholm, T. 2019. ‘Denmark’, in Verbruggen, F. and Franssen, V. (eds.), International Encyclopaedia of Laws: Criminal Law. Alphen aan den Rijn, NL: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
Law No. 1491 of 13 December 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law No. 1284 of 14 November 2018.Google Scholar
Law No. 1324 of 21 November 2018.Google Scholar
Nielsen, G. T. 2014. Strafferet 2. Sanktionerne. København: Djøf Forlag, pp. 69 et seq.Google Scholar
Nordisk Strafferetskomité, Betenkning om bøtestraffen, NU 1975:5, p. 12.Google Scholar
Order No. 624 of 25 June 2009.Google Scholar
Order No. 409 of 6 April 2015.Google Scholar
Rigsdagstidende 1938–9, Tillæg A, sp. 3766.Google Scholar
Straffelov nr. 126 af 15 april 1930.Google Scholar
Straffelovrådet, , Betænkning om Straffastsættelse og strafferammer 1424/2002, pp. 416 et seq.Google Scholar
Torp, C. 1917. Betænkning angaaende de af den under 11 August 1905 nedsatte Straffelovskommission udarbejdede Forslag indeholdende Udkast til Love vedrørende den borgerlige Straffelovgivning med Motiver. København, p. 76.Google Scholar
Waaben, K. 2001. Strafferettens almindelige del. Sanktionslæren. Copenhagen: Thomson GadJura.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×