scholarly journals Zahtev za povraćaj ulaganja zbog prestanka ugovora o kupoprodaji, najmu i građenju

2021 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 171-191
Author(s):  
Karmem Lutman

Rules on restitution for improvements made to someone else’s property can be found in various branches of Slovenian private law, such as the law of unjustified enrichment, negotiorum gestio, contract law and property law. Even though to some extent these rules deal with very similar situations, they differ in various aspects. While some of them are more favourable to the creditors in getting as much of their investment back as possible, others are more inclined toward protecting the debtor against forced financing of another’s economic decisions. This paper discusses some open dilemmas concerning restitution of improvements made to someone else’s property in Slovenian contract law. More precisely, it deals with restitutionary consequences of failed sales, lease and construction contracts and approaches this topic from a comparative perspective.

Author(s):  
Robert D. Cooter ◽  
Ariel Porat

This book examines how the law of torts, contracts, and restitution can be improved by showing how private law reduces the cost of accidents, lubricates bargains, and encourages unrequested benefits. It considers the two pervasive rules of tort law that provide incentives for actors to reduce accident costs: strict liability and negligence. It also explains how contract law achieves effiency through the remedy of damages and how restitution law allows benefactors to recover gains that their beneficiaries wrongfully obtained from them. The book makes three central claims: misalignments in tort law should be removed; in contract law, promisee's incentives should be improved; and the law should recognize some right of compensation for those who produce unrequested benefits. Each claim is based on the desire to reform private law and to make it more effective in promoting social welfare.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-28
Author(s):  
Jack Beatson ◽  
Andrew Burrows ◽  
John Cartwright

This introductory chapter first considers the nature and function of contract. It then discusses the contractual obligations in English law; the content of the contract law as set out in this book, which is concerned with the ‘general principles’ of contract rather than the detailed rules applicable to different types of contracts; the location of contract as part of the law of obligations and its relation to other parts of the law of obligations, tort and restitution of an unjust enrichment, and property law.


Contract Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. xl-14
Author(s):  
Ewan McKendrick

This introductory chapter begins by setting out the book’s three principal aims: to provide an exposition of the rules that make up the law of contract, to explore the law of contract in its transactional context, and to explore English contract law from a transnational and comparative perspective. The discussions then turn to the scope of the law of contracts; the growth in the use of standard form contracts and the increasing complexity of the form and the content of modern contracts; transnational contract law; and conflicting policies that underpin the law of contract.


Author(s):  
Daniel Visser

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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Straumann

AbstractMy Article seeks to explore a few antecedents of the idea that sovereignty may be encumbered with some obligations and duties vis-à-vis non-sovereigns and even strangers. Theories about limitations on sovereignty and obligations on the part of sovereigns often arose out of the fertile conceptual ground of Roman private law, in particular rules of property law governing usufruct and rules of contract law, such as those governing mandate. Early modern thinkers, especially Hugo Grotius (1583-1645), built on these ideas and, in addition, developed an account of moral and legal obligations arising, independently of God’s will, from a universal human nature. Building on Cicero, Grotius was among the first early-modern thinkers to elaborate the distinction between “perfect” duties of justice and “imperfect” duties of beneficence, an important idea that had wide influence through the work of Emer de Vattel (1714-1767). The Article closes by offering a few observations on the trajectories within which Professor Benvenisti’s concept of “sovereigns as trustees of humanity” could be situated.


2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 459-476
Author(s):  
Stephen A. Smith

In The Foundations of Private Law James Gordley argues that the modern private law in common and civil law jurisdictions is best explained on the basis of a neo-Aristotelian theory first developed by a group of 16th century Spanish thinkers known as the ‘late scholastics’. The concepts of distributive and commutative justice that, according to Gordley, lay at core of the scholastics’ theory and that explain, respectively, modern property law and the law of obligations (contract, tort, unjust enrichment), though ignored and disparaged for much of the 19th and 20th centuries, are today familiar to most private law scholars (thanks in part to Gordley’s earlier work). Yet Gordley’s understanding of these concepts and, in particular, of their relationship both to one another and to the apex idea of ‘living a distinctively human life’ is unique, setting his account apart not just from utilitarian and other ‘modern’ accounts of private law, but also from other neo-Aristotelian theories (e.g., those of Ernest Weinrib or Jules Coleman). In Gordley’s presentation, commutative (or ‘corrective’) justice is derived from distributive justice and distributive justice is derived from the idea of the distinctively human life. Confidently traversing a wide range of historical, comparative and theoretical materials, the book’s argument is at once ambitious, learned, and elegantly presented. But as a theoretical account of the foundations of the modern private law it is unpersuasive. The book’s own account of property law suggests that in practice the idea of distributive justice does little, if any, work in explaining the rules we actually have. Nor is it clear how, if at all, distributive justice flows from the allegedly foundational idea of the ’distinctively human life’. As for commutative justice, it is not clear why, if is derived from distributive justice in the way Gordley believes, the courts should care about it. Finally, but perhaps most significantly, Gordley’s conception of commutative justice is unable to account for central features of the law of obligations.


2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-165
Author(s):  
Haxhi Gashi ◽  
Bashkim Preteni

In most civil law jurisdictions, the contract is the most used derivative title for the transfer of ownership (movable and immovable property). Very often, the law of property and law of contract are seen as distinct and one can envisage their role from different legal perspectives. This is closely connected with the type of transfer system based on whether the (Austrian) causal system, (German) abstract system or (French) consensual system is applicable. Kosovo is in the process of civil law codification and the Kosovo Draft-Civil Code which has followed the application of the causal system of transfer of property and such an above mentioned interaction of these two branches of civil law is mandatory, and only with a common survey can the contractual transfer of property be illustrated. The aim of this paper is to focus solely on the influence of contract law rules in connection with the acquisition of ownership over movable and immovable property determined by Kosovo Draft-Civil Code.


Author(s):  
Anderson Ross G

Chapter 2 of the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (PICC) contains the core provisions on contract formation. It has two sections: the first deals with offers, acceptances, negotiations, standard terms, and standard firms; the second deals with agency. The fundamental rules on formation of contract which focus on the law of offer and acceptance are provided in Arts 2.1.1–2.1.14. The ‘classical’ model of contract law centres on the parties' agreement to assume obligations with private law consequences, whereas the ‘neoclassical’ model adopts a less strict approach but with a similar focus. This chapter covers contract formation in modern commercial practice, along with provisions relating to electronic signatures, letters of intent, and notices.


Author(s):  
Ewan McKendrick

This introductory chapter begins by setting out the book’s three principal aims: to provide an exposition of the rules that make up the law of contract, to explore the law of contract in its transactional context, and to explore English contract law from a transnational and comparative perspective. The discussions then turn to the scope of the law of contracts; the growth in the use of standard form contracts and the increasing complexity of the form and the content of modern contracts; transnational contract law; and conflicting policies that underpin the law of contract.


2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 142-156
Author(s):  
Jan Felix Hoffmann

Abstract Contract law and property law are traditionally viewed to be two separate fields of private law shaped by different principles. Over the past years a theory of contract law thoroughly drawing on the concept of “ownership” has been promoted by common law scholars. It leads at its core to the conclusion that the distinction between absolute and relative rights is irrelevant inter partes and that, therefore, a theoretical division between contract and property cannot be strictly maintained. This touches upon the fundamental distinction between absolute and relative rights raising the question why a contract does not automatically lead to an absolute right with regard to the substance of the promised performance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document