scholarly journals The Application of Provisions on Common Property Division and Provisions on Obligations as a Result of Unjustified Enrichment in Disputes Between Spouses over Collection of a Part of Profit Distributed by a Limited Liability Company

JURIST ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 30-36
Author(s):  
Oksana A. Gerasimova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Common Property ◽  
Family Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Unjust Enrichment ◽  
The Common ◽  
Unjustified Enrichment

The article deals with the issue of the rules applicable to resolving disputes between spouses on recovery of a part of the distributed profit of a limited liability company received by a spouse — a participant in a limited liability company. It is concluded that the recovery of the spouse (ex-spouse) with spouse (ex-spouse), the shares of part of the distributed profit belonging to the common property, shall be in accordance with the norms of family law on the division of common property, and not the civil law on obligations due to unjust enrichment.

scholarly journals BANKRUPTCY ESTATE OF THE DEBTOR’S SPOUSE: AN INTERSECTORAL ASPECT

2020 ◽  
pp. 26-30
Author(s):  
А.S. Salimov ◽  
S.V. Voronina
Keyword(s):  
Common Property ◽  
Family Law ◽  
Family Relations ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Bankruptcy Law ◽  
Joint Ownership ◽  
The Common

The bankruptcy estate of the debtor spouse is all property belonging to him both on the basis ofindividual and joint ownership, including unfulfilled property obligations. The composition of the propertyof spouses is determined by the rules of family law, taking into account the legal regulation of certain typesof property, which requires special attention when forming the bankruptcy estate of the debtor spouse. Thebankruptcy estate may include the property of a citizen, making up his share in the total property, which maybe levied in accordance with civil law, family law. Family relations are built on the principle of community,which affects the implementation of bankruptcy law. To foreclose on the share of the debtor spouse, it isnecessary to separate the share of the debtor spouse from the common property, while the bankruptcy lawallows the sale of common property with the subsequent payment of funds to the debtor’s spouse.

Unjustified Enrichment in Comparative Perspective

2019 ◽  
pp. 960-993
Author(s):  
Daniel Visser
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
Unjust Enrichment ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Common ◽  
The One ◽  
Level Of Understanding ◽  
Unjustified Enrichment

The emergence of unjust enrichment as a cause of action in its own right in England and Australia sparked a remarkable debate between, on the one hand, civil and common lawyers, who were confronted with thinking which was often completely outside the paradigm to which they had become accustomed, and, on the other hand, between common lawyers inter se about the merits of the various ways in which unjust enrichment may be understood and organized. At the heart of this debate was the struggle of the common law to confront and deal with the deficit caused by its reliance solely on ‘unjust factors’ to make sense of enrichment liability without taking account of the notion of ‘absence of basis’. This chapter argues that comparative lawyers can make an important contribution to the future of the fractured and fractious world of unjustified enrichment by uncovering the enormous wealth of learning of which both the common law and the civil law are the repositories, and so bring the same level of understanding to the law of unjustified enrichment which has, over the years, been achieved between the systems in regard to contract and tort.

Classifying precontractual liability: a comparative analysis

Legal Studies ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joachim Dietrich
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Common Elements ◽  
Ongoing Debate ◽  
Unjust Enrichment ◽  
The Common ◽  
Initial Focus

The common law has solved questions of liability arising in the context of precontractual negotiations by resort to a range of different doctrines and approaches, adopting in effect ‘piecemeal’ solutions to questions of precontractual liability. Consequently, debate has arisen as to how best to classify or categorise claims for precontractual work and as to which doctrines are best suited to solving problems arising from anticipated contracts. The purpose of this article is to consider this question of how best to classify (cases of) precontractual liability. The initial focus will be on the ongoing debate as to whether principles of contract law or principles of unjust enrichment can better solve problems of precontractual liability. I will be suggesting that unjust enrichment theory offers little by way of explanation of cases of precontractual liability and, indeed, draws on principles of contract law in determining questions of liability for precontractual services rendered, though it does so by formulating those principles under different guises. Irrespective, however, of the doctrines utilised by the common law to impose liability, it is possible to identify a number of common elements unifying all cases of precontractual liability. In identifying such common elements of liability, it is necessary to draw on principles of both contract and tort law. How, then, should cases of precontractual liability best be classified? A consideration of the issue of classification of precontractual liability from a perspective of German civil law will demonstrate that a better understanding of cases of precontractual liability will be gained by classifying such cases as lying between the existing categories of contract and tort.

scholarly journals Concepts And Features Of The Corporate Contract

2019 ◽  
pp. 121-134
Author(s):  
R.S. Lukashov
Keyword(s):  
Civil Law ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Key Factors ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Contractual Structures

The article is devoted to the theoretical and legal analyses of the place of a corporate agreement in the system of civil contracts. The article identifies the key factors that justify a separate place of the corporate agreement among existing contractual structures of civil law. The article deals with scientific views on the concept and legal nature of the corporate agreement, outlines the subject of the corporate agreement, which is concluded between the participants of the legal entity of corporate type, as well as analyzed the latest legislation on the definition of the concept, subject and content of the corporate agreement, which is concluded between the members of the limited liability company.  

scholarly journals Penguatan Kampung Santri untuk Pengembangan Masyarakat Sadar Hukum di Wilayah Mangkang Kota Semarang

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 253
Author(s):  
Rihlatul Khoiriyah ◽  
Ali Imron ◽  
Ahmad Munif ◽  
Lathifah Munawaroh
Keyword(s):  
Family Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Common Point ◽  
The State ◽  
Cultural Approach ◽  
Positive Law ◽  
The People ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Village

<p>This paper intends to see the extent of legal awareness of the community in the village area of the santri against family law derived from national legal products. The results of the study show two main points, first, the understanding of Islamic civil law (marriage and inheritance) of Mangkang region society is dominated to the accepted understanding of classical fiqh. The people of Mangkang region are not anti-starch against the civil law of Islam issued by the state in the form of positive law. Although the Mangkang area people see that both are ijtihadiyah products, but the existence of Indonesian civil law that has an administrative effect on others makes them accept a good denan. Second, a persuasive approach in the form of a cultural approach is more readily accepted by citizens. Mangkang area people feel comfortable when invited to dialogue and discussion related to Islamic civil law of Indonesia. In the end, by reaching the common point and the good that might be obtained, Indonesian civil law can be understood and well accepted.</p><p> </p><p>Tulisan ini bermaksud melihat sejauh mana kesadaran hukum masyarakat di wilayah kampung santri terhadap hukum keluarga yang bersumber dari produk hukum nasional. Hasil dari kajian menunjukkan dua hal pokok, pertama, pemahaman hukum perdata Islam (penikahan dan kewarisan)  masyarakat wilayah Mangkang didominasi kepada pemahaman yang diterima fiqh klasik. Masyarakat wilayah Mangkang tidak anti pati terhadap hukum perdata Islam yang dikeluarkan negara dalam bentuk hukum positif. Meskipun masyarakat wilayah Mangkang melihat bahwa keduanya merupakan produk ijtihadiyah, namun keberadaan hukum perdata Islam Indonesia yang memiliki dampak administratif kepada yang lainnya menjadikan mereka bisa menerima denan baik. Kedua, pendekatan persuasif dalam bentuk pendekatan budaya lebih mudah diterima oleh warga masyarakat. Masyarakat wilayah Mangkang merasa nyaman ketika diajak berdialog dan berdiskusi terkait hukum perdata Islam Indonesia. Pada akhirnya, dengan mencapai titik temu dan kebaikan yang mungkin akan didapat, hukum perdata Islam Indonesia bisa dipahami dan diterima dengan baik..</p>

Unjustified Enrichment in Comparative Perspective

2006 ◽  
pp. 968-1002
Author(s):  
Daniel Visser
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Common ◽  
English Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Level Of Understanding ◽  
Unjustified Enrichment

Unjustified enrichment confronted both civil and common lawyers with thinking which was often completely outside the paradigm to which they had become accustomed. The recognition of unjustified enrichment as a cause of action in its own right in English law created a new arena of uncertainty between the systems. This article argues that comparative lawyers can make an important contribution to the future of the fractured and fractious world of unjustified enrichment. It may help to uncover the enormous wealth of learning of which both the common law and the civil law are the repositories, and so bring the same level of understanding to the law of unjustified enrichment which has, over the years, been achieved between the systems in regard to contract and tort.

BOARD MEMBERS’ RESPONSIBILITY IN A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY. THE PERSPECTIVE OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 47-57
Author(s):  
Adam Samborski
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Legal Practice

The aim of the article is to evaluate legal solutions contained in the Act of 15 September 2000. Code of Commercial Companies concerning civil and criminal responsibility of board members in a limited liability company. The evaluation of legal solutions was based on the concept of corporate governance. It was assumed in the considerations that legal responsibility is an incentive to encourage board members to act in the interest of the company’s creditors, company and shareholders. In accordance with the regulations on civil law responsibility of the board members, the protected good is the good of the creditors and the company. The adopted legal solutions protect the shareholders in an indirect way. Under criminal law, the legislator penalises those actions or omissions of board members which harm a wider range of stakeholders, i.e. the company’s creditors, company, shareholders, contractors. In conclusion, it is emphasised that the Act of 15 September 2000. Commercial Companies Code comprehensively and exhaustively regulates the issue of responsibility of board members. However, a full assessment requires an analysis of the judicial and legal practice, which is not under consideration

Transforming a sole proprietorship into a limited liability company – selected tax aspects

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (XIX) ◽  
pp. 309-321
Author(s):  
Monika Niziołkiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Income Tax ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Tax Law ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Personal Income Tax ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Sole Proprietorship ◽  
Administrative Jurisdiction ◽  
Legal Consequences

This article deals with the transformation of a sole proprietorship into a sole-shareholder limited liability company, with particular emphasis on tax aspects. Considerations are supported by numerous rulings of courts of general and administrative jurisdiction, as well as interpretations of the tax authorities. At the beginning, the author presents the binding normative acts regulating this subject and the main reasons for transformations. The methods of transforming a sole proprietorship into a sole-shareholder limited liability company binding until the end of 2011 have been described, as well as provisions regulating the issue of formal transformation. In the further part of the article the legal consequences of formal transformation were discussed, with particular emphasis on the succession of rights and obligations under tax law. The next part of the article is devoted to the effects of transformation on the basis of the tax on goods and services, personal income tax and income tax from juridical persons, as well as tax on civil law transactions.

scholarly journals Improving the Regulation of Joint Rights in Civil Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (30) ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Ekaterine Nandoshvili
Keyword(s):  
Common Property ◽  
Practical Importance ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Correct Understanding ◽  
Full Protection

This paper focuses on analyzing the norms regulating joint rights, presents their shortcomings, and criticizes the misconceptions expressed in the legal literature about the types of common property, joint rights, and co-ownership. The paper considers the incompleteness of the provisions regulating the legal consequences of the abolition of joint rights as a serious shortcoming of the Civil Code of Georgia. A novelty is a mechanism proposed in this paper, and it is possible to assign the entire property to one of the participants in case of abolition of joint right, in exchange for compensation for the shareholder who requests the abolition of joint right and the allocation of the amount. The objective of the paper is to analyze certain aspects of the regulation of joint rights, which, together with the theoretical, have the practical importance that will contribute to a correct understanding of a number of issues and the correct qualification of the rights and obligations of participants of the legally binding relationship, rising on the basis of joint rights. To achieve this objective, logical and systematic analysis of norms as well as comparative-legal methods are used. Using these methods, it is possible to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the norms of Georgian law or to better understand their content, to identify gaps in the legislation in court practice, as well as to develop proposals and recommendations for the improvement of norms and practice. The problems are analyzed using the examples of Georgian, German, and Swiss civil law. The common features and shortcomings were identified between the Georgian and German models regarding the issue of the consequences of the abolition of joint rights. The Swiss model appears to be the most perfect and effective model among the named ones. The study found that neither in practice nor under the law is a shareholder allowed to sell the joint item in an auction by redeeming the shares of other owners. The extinction of this opportunity for the owner reduces the essence of ownership. In order to extend the guarantees for full protection of the property rights, a view is proposed on the need to develop an approach, similar to the Swiss model, and the implementation should be ensured by case law before the law is changed.

scholarly journals Application of the Principles of Business Judgment in the Authoritative Function of Directors of Limited Liability Company in Singaporean and Indonesian Legal Perspectives

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 93
Author(s):  
Daniel Hendrawan ◽  
Emilia Fitriana Dewi ◽  
Subiakto Sukarno ◽  
Isti Raafaldini Mirzanti
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
The Difference

The purpose of this study is to analyze the functions and authority of the director of limited liability company in applying business judgment principles, by taking comparative law studies in Singapore's common law and in Indonesia's civil law. By taking emphasis on the authority of directors in representing limited companies both in and out, there are several authorities that are regulated in it. This study was conducted with a comparative law approach, with descriptive qualitative analysis. The results showed that sometimes directors act outside their authority and can harm a limited liability company. On the other hand, that there are actions of the board of directors that are in accordance with their authority but still harm the limited liability company. In this case, the shareholders often hold accountable. In corporate law there is a principle of business judgment where a director cannot be held accountable if the directors are proven to have good faith. The difference between Singapore law and Indonesian law in regulating the authority of directors is the good faith assessment held by directors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document