scholarly journals Odgovornost u sportu - neka (sporna) pitanja

2021 ◽  
pp. 233-245
Author(s):  
Hrvoje Kačer ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Third Parties ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Sports Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
Important Branch

Sports law is a relatively new but very important branch of the law. It is essential to protect athletes at the amateur level and at the professional level from each other, as well as from the third parties. This paper analyzes some legal issues of the liability in sport, primarly about types of responsibilities in sports law.

Formation of Contract and Third Parties in Cambodia

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ly Tayseng
Keyword(s):  
Academic Writing ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
Contract Formation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Formal Requirements

This chapter gives an overview of the law on contract formation and third party beneficiaries in Cambodia. Much of the discussion is tentative since the new Cambodian Civil Code only entered into force from 21 December 2011 and there is little case law and academic writing fleshing out its provisions. The Code owes much to the Japanese Civil Code of 1898 and, like the latter, does not have a requirement of consideration and seldom imposes formal requirements but there are a few statutory exceptions from the principle of freedom from form. For a binding contract, the agreement of the parties is required and the offer must be made with the intention to create a legally binding obligation and becomes effective once it reaches the offeree. The new Code explicitly provides that the parties to the contract may agree to confer a right arising under the contract upon a third party. This right accrues directly from their agreement; it is not required that the third party declare its intention to accept the right.

scholarly journals The partial waiver of the rights and partial invalidation of rights to the invention

2021 ◽  
pp. 51-59
Author(s):  
Petro Borovyk
Keyword(s):  
Legal Protection ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Utility Model ◽  
Patent Owner ◽  
The Third ◽  
Utility Models ◽  
The Law ◽  
State Registration ◽  
The Right

Borovyk P. The partial waiver of the rights and partial invalidation of rights to the invention. In view of changes in the Law of Ukraine «About protection of rights for inventions and utility models» introduced according to the Law No. 816-IX as of 21.07.2020, it is implied that a patent owner can waive rights provided by a state registration of an invention (utility model) fully or partially, and a court can render the rights for the invention (utility model) invalid fully or partially. The partial waiver of the rights or rendering the rights invalid causes a number of issues on a rather frequent basis, in particular, regarding a certain procedure of defining the entire scope of rights according to the patent and a portion of these rights. Since the scope of rights is defined by claims, the partial waiver of the rights or the partial rendering the rights invalid substantially represents a change of the scope of rights, which are defined by the claims as published. The patent may be granted for a group of inventions. In such case, the scope of rights shall be defined by the claims that comprise several independent claims. Here, the partial waiver of the rights for the invention may be carried out by waiving one or several independent claims at the discretion of the patent owner or by rendering one or several independent claims invalid by the court. Therewith, the scope of rights that is defined during conduction of an examination for another invention of the group of inventions, which are mentioned in a single protection document (patent), is not changed. The partial waiver or the partial rendering the rights for the invention invalid for the claims having one independent claim is a more problematic case. A key aspect of this problem is an influence of the proposed amendments of the claims onto the scope of rights for the invention and its correspondence with the requirements for granting a legal protection. More specifically, it is an establishment of a fact of reduction of the scope of rights when introducing the proposed amendments into the independent claim and examination of a new version of the independent claim for compliance with the requirements of patentability. An important aspect also lies in establishment of a balance of interests of the patent owner and third parties. The patent owner will receive a mechanism of implementation of the right for protection of allowable embodiments of the invention, while the third parties will receive a right for a legal certainty by means of an analysis of the scope of rights of the new version of the claims. The article discloses grounds for waiving the rights for the invention and the mechanism for implementation of the waiver under the legislation in force both for the case of the group of inventions and for the partial waiver or the partial rendering the rights for the invention invalid with the claims having one independent claim. Keywords: scope of rights, independent and dependent claims, amendment to claims, proceedings

Conditions in Favour of Third Parties

1952 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 240-257
Author(s):  
T. C. Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party

The purpose of this article is to consider the legal effects of a transfer of property by A to B subject to the performance by B of some obligation in favour of C, a third party to the transfer. The student of the law of contract is well familiar with the common law rule that no one who was not an original party to the contract is entitled to the benefit of that contract. But this rule creates hardship in particular cases and it has been shown that, in the main, three methods have been evolved to evade those unfortunate results. First, the legislature has intervened and provided C, the third party, with statutory rights. Secondly, the doctrine of agency has been invoked whereby C may claim that he is the principal of B. Thirdly, but with varying success, the trust concept has been pressed into service whereby C has sometimes been able to show that he is a beneficiary.

scholarly journals Kolizyjnoprawna problematyka skuteczności przelewu wierzytelności wobec osób trzecich — projekt rozporządzenia Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady w sprawie prawa właściwego dla skutków przelewu wierzytelności wobec osób trzecich (COM(2018) 96 final)

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 67-90
Author(s):  
Witold Kurowski
Keyword(s):  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Eu Regulation ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
Contractual Obligations ◽  
Rome I

The question of which law should govern the third-party effects of assignments of claims was considered during the preparation of the Rome I Regulation. The European Commission’s proposal for the Rome I Regulation admitted the law of the assignor’s habitual residence as the law that should apply to the proprietary effects of assignments of claims. Finally, EU Regulation on the law applicable to contractual obligations did not include the issue of the third-party effects of the assignment. However, Article 27(2) of the Rome I Regulation required the European Commission to present a report on the question of the effectiveness of assignments of claims against third parties accompanied, if appropriate, by a proposal to amend the Rome I Regulation. Proposal for a Regulation on the law applicable to the third-party effects of assignments of claims (COM(2018) 96 final) is a response to this request. This paper analyses current draft of the new EU Regulation, the rules on determination of the third-party effects of assignments of claims (law of the assignor’s habitual residence and law of the assigned claim) and "super conflict rules" in specific cases. The author argues that the law of the assignor’s habitual residence remains the appropriate conflict rule for proprietary effects of assignments of claims.

Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties: Hong Kong

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee Mason
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Strict Adherence ◽  
The Third ◽  
English Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
Contractual Rights

This chapter analyses the law on third party beneficiaries in Hong Kong long characterized by strict adherence to the traditional common law doctrine of privity. The law relating to third party rights was only reformed by way of Ordinance in 2016, along the lines of the statutory reform of English law in 1999. A small number of specifically enumerated types of contract are excluded from the scope of the Ordinance; other contracts may be concluded to confer enforceable contractual rights on third parties. Whether a third party may enforce a term of a contract depends on the interpretation of the contract: if the third party right was not expressly conferred there is a presumption that the conferral was intended; but this can be rebutted if the parties made it clear that they did not intend it to be enforceable. The third party must be identified by name, as a member of a class, or answering a particular description and may claim the same remedies for breach as a party to the contract.

scholarly journals The Future of DTC Genomics and the Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-160
Author(s):  
Henry T. Greely
Keyword(s):  
Legal Issues ◽  
Genomic Information ◽  
Human Genomics ◽  
Direct To Consumer ◽  
The Third ◽  
Human Dna ◽  
The Future ◽  
Controversial Topic ◽  
The Law

Direct-to-Consumer (“DTC”) genomics has been a controversial topic for over a decade. Much work has been done on the legal issues it raises. This article asks a different question: What will DTC genomics and its legal issues look like in ten to twenty years? After discussing the five current uses of DTC genomics, it describes three current legal issues: medical uses, privacy of genomic information, and privacy in collection and analysis of human DNA. It then suggests that changes in human genomics and how it is used will make the first of those DTC genomics legal issues less important in the future, but that the third will be increasingly significant.

7. Privity of contract and third party rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 272-312
Author(s):  
Robert Merkin ◽  
Séverine Saintier ◽  
Jill Poole
Keyword(s):  
Contract Law ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Legislative Reform ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
Privity Of Contract

Course-focused and comprehensive, Poole’s Textbook on Contract Law provides an accessible overview of the key areas on the law curriculum. According to the doctrine of privity of contract, only the parties to the contract are bound by, or can enforce, the obligations under the contract. A person who is not a party to a contract does not have any rights under that contract and is not subject to any of its obligations (or burdens). This chapter considers the rules of contract law, and related rules, that are applicable to contracts which stipulate third party rights. It considers the relevant provisions of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, the scope of the legislative reform, the test for third party enforceability and how the doctrine of privity of contract is related to the consideration requirement. It also looks at means of circumventing the privity doctrine such as assignment, and exceptions to the privity doctrine such as agency principles as employed in The Eurymedon. The chapter then examines remedies available to the promisee which have the effect of enforcing any promise in favour of a third party beneficiary or enabling substantial damages to be recovered to cover the third party’s loss. Finally, the means by which contractual burdens may bind third parties are examined.

11. Privity of contract and third party rights

2019 ◽  
pp. 442-482
Author(s):  
Robert Merkin ◽  
Séverine Saintier
Keyword(s):  
Contract Law ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Legislative Reform ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
Privity Of Contract

Course-focused and comprehensive, the Textbook on series provides an accessible overview of the key areas on the law curriculum. According to the doctrine of privity of contract, only the parties to the contract are bound by, or can enforce the obligations under the contract. A person who is not a party to a contract does not have any rights under that contract and is not subject to any of its obligations (or burdens). This chapter considers the rules of contract law, and related rules, that are applicable to contracts which stipulate third party rights. It considers the relevant provisions of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, the scope of the legislative reform, the test for third party enforceability and how the doctrine of privity of contract is related to the consideration requirement. It also looks at means of circumventing the privity doctrine such as assignment, and exceptions to the privity doctrine such as agency principles as employed in The Eurymedon. The chapter then examines remedies available to the promisee which have the effect of enforcing any promise in favour of a third party beneficiary or enabling substantial damages to be recovered to cover the third party’s loss. Finally, the means by which contractual burdens may bind third parties are examined.

scholarly journals Investigating Sanction of the Conditions in the Settlement Contract with Regard to Registration of Deeds and Real Estate

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Afsaneh Narimisa ◽  
Alireza Entezari
Keyword(s):  
Real Estate ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
The Other ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Legal Problem ◽  
The Third ◽  
General Rules ◽  
Settlement Agreement ◽  
The Law

Considering that Articles 47 and 48 of the Registration Law have stated that registration of the document of settlement contract is obligatory and its sanction is the non-acceptability of unofficial documents in courts and departments. However, it must be said that these articles do not declare the invalidity of normal documents absolutely, but the meaning of the non-acceptability of such documents is that they cannot be referred to in relation to third parties, while such documents are valid and authentic for the parties to the contract, and because of the fact that the document is a normal contract, the parties to the contract cannot refuse to fulfill their commitment and execute the contract by the excuse that such documents must have been registered in accordance with the law. Therefore, referring to ordinary settlement agreement, the grantee cannot claim the propriety of some property against persons other than grantor, but in the case of denial of the occurrence of a transaction between the parties to the settlement, the beneficiary can refer to the ordinary document of that transaction to prove the occurrence of the transaction between themself and the other person, and such a reference is reviewable by the court. In addition to that the grantor and grantee can refer to ordinary document and any provable evidence in their controversy and dispute about the settlement subject and prove the occurrence of settlement, the grantee can bring an action against the grantor and obligate them to arrange an official settlement document by proving the settlement and by invoking to Article 220 of the Civil Code, because according to the mentioned article, transactors are not only committed to what is stated in the contract, but are also committed to all the results of the contract in accordance with customs or law. However, if a dispute occurs between the grantee and a third party about the settlement subject and an action is brought, then if the grantee presents the ordinary settlement document to prove their ownership, the court according to the Registration Law will not consider that document effective, and the grantee may even be convicted against the third party. The settlement is not correct if its provisions arecontrary to the law, order and the general rules, and if the settlement document arranged in a notary office has a substantive, procedural or legal problem then the competent legal authorities such as the High Council of Registry investigate the issue and the provisions applicable will be issued.

Judicial Expansion of the Tarasoff Doctrine: Doctors’ Dilemma

1985 ◽  
Vol 13 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 83-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth M. Crocker
Keyword(s):  
Third Parties ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Legal Obligation ◽  
The Law

The Tarasoff case established that a psychotherapist has a legal obligation to breach a patient's confidence in certain circumstances. The subsequent judicial expansion of the original Tarasoff doctrine raises additional legal issues that confront a psychotherapist in a Tarasoff-type dilemma where the law holds the protection of third parties outweighs the patient's right to confidentiality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document