scholarly journals The assignment of the right of usufruct

2021 ◽  
pp. 5-7
Author(s):  
Ion Bitca ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Right

Usually the right of usufruct is constituted in the consideration of the identity of the person of the usufructuary, being a personal intuition contract. The rule that follows from the provisions of the Civil Code regarding the transfer by the usufructuary of the usufruct right constituted in his favor is that of its inalienability. By way of exception, it is possible for the usufructuary to assign the right to a third party but only if the following conditions are met: this possibility was provided for in the incorporation contra

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.

KEPEMILIKAN DAN PENGUASAAN OBJEK JAMINAN FIDUSIA APABILA TERJADI SENGKETA WANPRESTASI DALAM PERJANJIAN KREDIT

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 78
Author(s):  
Dija Hedistira ◽  
' Pujiyono
Keyword(s):  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
The Other ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

<p>Abstract<br />This article aims to analyze the ownership and mastery of a fiduciary collateral object, in cases that often occur today, many disputes between creditors and debtors in fiduciary collateral agreements are caused because creditors assume that with executive rights as fiduciary recipients, the fiduciary collateral object legally owned by creditors and creditors the right to take and sell fiduciary collateral objects when the debtor defaults unilaterally, as well as the debtor who considers that the fiduciary collateral object is owned by him because the object is registered on his name, so that the debtor can use the object free as  giving to a third party or selling the object of fiduciary guarantee unilaterally. the author uses a normative <br />juridical approach, and deductive analysis method based on the Civil Code and fiduciary law applicable in Indonesia, Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees. The conclusion of the discussion is the ownership of the object of the Fiduciary Guarantee is owned by the debtor in accordance with the Law, mastery of the object of collateral controlled by the debtor for economic benefits, the procedure of execution The object of Fiduciary Guarantee is carried out in accordance with the Fiduciary Guarantee Act, an alternative mediation in resolving the dispute. There needs to be clarity in the use of language in making a law, so as not to conflict with each other between Article one and the other Articles.<br />Keywords: Ownership; Mastery; Object of Fiduciary Guarantee; Debtor; Creditors.</p><p>Abstrak<br />Artikel ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis tentang kepemilikan dan penguasaan suatu objek jaminan fidusia, dalam kasus yang saat ini sering terjadi, banyak sengketa antara kreditur dan debitur dalam perjanjian jaminan fidusia disebabkan karena kreditur beranggapan bahwa dengan adanya hak eksekutorial sebagai penerima fidusia, maka objek jaminan fidusia tersebut secara sah dimiliki oleh kreditur dan kreditur berhak mengambil dan menjual objek jaminan fidusia saat debitur cidera janji<br />(wanprestasi) secara sepihak, begitupun dengan debitur yang menganggap bahwa objek jaminan fidusia tersebut dimiliki olehnya karena objek tersebut terdaftar atas namannya, sehingga debitur dapat mempergunakan objek tersebut secara bebas seperti menyerahkan kepada pihak ketiga atau menjual objek jaminan fidusia tersebut secara sepihak. penulis menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif, dan metode analisis deduktif yang didasarkan pada Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata<br />dan hukum jaminan fidusia yang berlaku di Indonesia, Undang-Undang No. 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia. Kesimpulan pembahasan adalah Kepemilikan Objek Jaminan Fidusia dimiliki oleh debitur sesuai Undang-undang, penguasaan objek jaminan dikuasai debitur untuk manfaat ekonomis, prosedur eksekusi Objek Jaminan Fidusia dilakukan sesuai dengan Undang-Undang Jaminan Fidusia, alternatif secara mediasi dalam menyelesaikan sengketa yang terjadi. Perlu ada kejelasan dalam<br />penggunaan bahasa pada pembuatan suatu Undang-Undang, agar tidak saling bertentangan antar Pasal satu dengan Pasal yang lainnya. <br />Kata Kunci: Kepemilikan; Penguasaan; Objek Jaminan Fidusia; Debitur; Kreditur.</p>

scholarly journals Investigating the Custody in Shiite Jurisprudence and Civil Rights in France

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 230
Author(s):  
Mahdi Nazemi ◽  
Abbas Ali Salehi
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Child Custody ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Child Rearing ◽  
Religious Orders ◽  
Spiritual Dimension ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Opinion

Custody in Islam is the procedure for child rearing, which effects his physical and material context. What kept custody of the child apart from other issues, is attention to the spiritual dimension of the child and considering the child needs. Child custody and disputes on it leads to be an important issue for parents in countries civil law. In civil rights it becomes as well as the important of religious orders and opinions of jurists, in this regard recommendations are provided on how to improve the supervision and laws of our country's children for a better life. Therefore, in this case, it is needed to examine the legal opinion regarding to the custody of the two legal systems of Iran and France. The first custody must be investigated and have priority to the custody of the father or mother. In Iranian Civil Code the right and duty of parents in custody knows some right and some homework. In French Civil Code custody of parents towards children in all areas of life for the growth, maintenance and education of children is common and conspicuous aspects of its obligatory. The exercise of the custody right is shared between parents and conditions are considered the parent with custody situations where their absence is excused. Parents under certain circumstances can have the right to self-disclaimer or leave to a third party to ask the court about the right.

scholarly journals ACTIO PAULIANA SEBAGAI UPAYA PERLINDUNGAN BAGI KREDITOR MENURUT KITAB UNDANG-UNDANG HUKUM PERDATA DAN UNDANG-UNDANG KEPAILITAN DAN PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG (PKPU)

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 21
Author(s):  
Rai Mantili
Keyword(s):  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Party ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Action ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Debt Repayment ◽  
The Right

Actio Pauliana is the right given to a creditor to cancel the debtor’s agreement with a third party. The purpose of this actio pauliana is to avoid losses from its creditors, by requesting the court to cancel the debtor’s legal action which is deemed to be detrimental to his creditors. Actio Pauliana provisions apart from being regulated in the Civil Code, are also regulated in Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Repayment Obligation (UUKPKPU). However, the two rules have several diff erences. In this paper, the author wants to explain about Actio Pauliana which is regulated in the Civil Code and Actio Pauliana which is regulated in UUKPKPU in order to provide protection for creditors. This writing gives the result that Actio Pauliana’s lawsuit which is regulated in the Civil Code is submitted to the District Court and cannot be justifi ed and can take a long time. Unlike the case with Actio Pauliana which is regulated in the UUPKPU, the fi ling of a lawsuit is made to the Commercial Court and can be proven simply so that it can provide more protection for creditors.

scholarly journals NAMED AND UNNAMED KINDS OF PERSONAL ENSURING

2019 ◽  
pp. 62-66
Author(s):  
L. S. Shymon
Keyword(s):  
Financial Institution ◽  
Special Kind ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Financial Risks ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Full Responsibility ◽  
Contractual Obligations ◽  
The Right

The article deals with the named and unnamed special kinds of enforcement of the obligation. Special kinds of the fulfillment of an obligation ensuring are proposed to be considered as a means of protecting the rights of the creditor in contractual obligations, where the fulfillment of obligations caused by the debtor is due to the fulfillment of the obligation of the third (other than the debtor) of the surety, guarantor, joint or subsidiary debtor, insurer. Among the named kinds of securing the fulfillment of the obligation is investigated surety and warranty. Surety as a special kind of ensuring the fulfillment of the obligation means that in the event of a debtor breaking the obligation secured by it, the creditor’s property interests are met by a third party – guarantor. Surety arises exclusively on the basis of the concluded contract on surety. A surety contract may be concluded not only between the creditor and the surety, but also as a tripartite agreement between the creditor, the debtor and the surety, for example, when a surety contract is concluded as one of the part of the main contract. A surety agreement gives the right to thecreditor in the event of breach of a secured obligation to require the guarantor to fulfill the obligation incurred by the debtor. The surety is liable to the creditor so as a debtor, including the payment of principal debt, interests, penalty, damages, that is, he bears full responsibility for the debtor. As a rule, the surety and the debtor act as solidary debtors. The guarantee, as personal kind of ensuring the fulfillment of the obligation, protects the violated rights of the creditor by the way of enforcing the guarantor to bear responsibility for breaching the obligation by the debtor. Under guarantee, a bank, another financial institution, an insurance organization (guarantor) guarantees to the creditor (beneficiary) the fulfillment of the debtor (principal) of his duty. The guarantor independently is responsible to the creditor for violation of the obligation by the debtor. He is not a solidary debtor. The article considers the possibility of recognizing insurance as one of the unnamed to the research of insurance financial risks and insurance. Оf responsibility of the personal kinds of enforcement of the obligation fulfillment. This problem is given special attention. The author also proposes to refer to the unnamed types of enforcement of the obligation fulfillment the following: factoring – financing in the case of the right deviation to money claim, which legal structure has found its securing in Article 1077 of the Civil Code of Ukraine.

scholarly journals EKSEKUSI JAMINAN PERORANGAN (BORGTOCHT) DALAM PENYELESAIAN KREDIT MACET MELALUI KEPAILITAN (ANALISIS PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG RI NOMOR 2960 K/Pdt/2010)

Jurnal MINUTA ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-19
Author(s):  
Evi Retno Wati
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
The Right

Generally collateral is divided into two, namely personal guarantee (persoonlijke zekerheid) and corporeal guarantee (zakerlijke zekerheid). On Personal collateral, what given by debtor was not an object but a statement made by the third party who has no interest at all both toward debtor or creditor. In the case that was reviewed in this research to wit The supreme court of Republic of Indonesia decree No. 2960 K/Pdt/2010 PT. Pertamina Dana Ventura (first named PT. Pertamina Saving & Investment), as a creditor filed a confiscation guarantee claim toward Kairudin Nur who is the guarantor of the debt of PT. Goro Bata Sakti (in bankruptcy) as a debtor. Guarantor in Indonesian Civil Code (later stated as KUHPer) is given a privilege which is stated in article 1831 KUHPer which given right to the guarantor to reject payment to creditor before the creditor’s property confiscated first and sold in order to pay the debts. If after the debtor’s property confiscated and sold are not enough to pay the debts, then in this case the guarantor is responsible for fulfilling the debts toward creditor. In The supreme court of Republic of Indonesia decree No. 2960 K/Pdt/2010, the guarantor right as ruled in KUHPer is violated. Therefore the law protection that can be given to the guarantor is the guarantor is given the right to accelerate the management and settlement toward debtor’s assets which were under curator supervision.

Relaxations of Contractual Privity and the Need for Third Party Rights in Chinese Contract Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chen Lei
Keyword(s):  
Direct Action ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Chinese Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
Right Of Action ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines the position of third party beneficiaries in Chinese law. Article 64 of the Chinese Contract Law states that where a contract for the benefit of a third party is breached, the debtor is liable to the creditor. The author regards this as leaving unanswered the question of whether the thirdparty has a right of direct action against the debtor. One view regards the third party as having the right to sue for the benefit although this right was ultimately excluded from the law. Another view, supported by the Supreme People’s Court, is that Article 64 does not provide a right of action for a third party and merely prescribes performance in ‘incidental’ third party contracts. The third view is that there is a third party right of action in cases of ‘genuine’ third party contracts but courts are unlikely to recognize a third party action where the contract merely purports to confer a benefit on the third party.

Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties Under the Taiwan Civil Code

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheng-Lin JAN
Keyword(s):  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Relationship ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
Privity Of Contract

This chapter discusses the position of third party beneficiaries in Taiwan law where the principle of privity of contract is well established. Article 269 of the Taiwan Civil Code confers a right on the third party to sue for performance as long as the parties have at least impliedly agreed. This should be distinguished from a ‘spurious contract’ for the benefit of third parties where there is no agreement to permit the third party to claim. Both the aggrieved party and the third party beneficiary can sue on the contract, but only for its own loss. The debtor can only set off on a counterclaim arising from its legal relationship with the third party. Where the third party coerces the debtor into the contract, the contract can be avoided, but where the third party induces the debtor to contract with the creditor by misrepresentation, the debtor can only avoid the contract if the creditor knows or ought to have known of the misrepresentation.

Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties in Japan

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masami Okino
Keyword(s):  
Case Analysis ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
German Model ◽  
Recent Debate ◽  
The Law

This chapter discusses the law on third party beneficiaries in Japan; mostly characterized by adherence to the German model that still bears an imprint on Japanese contract law. Thus, there is neither a doctrine of consideration nor any other justification for a general doctrine of privity, and contracts for the benefit of third parties are generally enforceable as a matter of course. Whether an enforceable right on the part of a third party is created is simply a matter of interpretation of the contract which is always made on a case-by-case analysis but there are a number of typical scenarios where the courts normally find the existence (or non-existence) of a contract for the benefit of a third party. In the recent debate on reform of Japanese contract law, wide-ranging suggestions were made for revision of the provisions on contracts for the benefit of third parties in the Japanese Civil Code. However, it turned out that reform in this area was confined to a very limited codification of established case law.

Ustawowe i umowne prawo pierwokupu przysługujące dzierżawcy nieruchomości rolnych – wybrane problemy prawne

2021 ◽  
pp. 375-394
Author(s):  
Aneta Suchoń
Keyword(s):  
Real Estate ◽  
Agricultural Land ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Agricultural System ◽  
Business Activity ◽  
Legal Regulations ◽  
Legal Problems ◽  
Agricultural Support ◽  
The Right ◽  
In The Beginning

The article aimed to determine whether the legal regulations in the field of the statutory and contractual pre-emption right of a tenant of agricultural real estate provide adequate protection to dependent owners in terms of the possibility of acquiring such land and conducting business activity on it. Secondly, the paper indicated legal problems related to statutory and contractual pre-emption right of a tenant of agricultural real estate and suggested how those problems could be handled. In the beginning, the considerations focused on the statutory pre-emption right for agricultural real estate. It referred to a subjective and objective scope of the right in question, and an attempt was made to determine whether the leased land can be sold to a third party due to the obligation to run a farm in person (only the sale contract allows for exercising the pre-emptive right). Failure to perform the indicated obligations might result in the case being referred to the court by the National Center for Agricultural Support. The second part of the article discussed the contractual pre-emption right for agricultural real estate. The author pointed out the possible concurrence of the statutory pre-emption right of the National Support Centre for Agriculture and the contractual pre-emption right of the lessee. The paper also referred to the problems related to implementing this right due to the requirements that the buyer must meet. In summary, the author, among other things, pointed out the fact that the importance of the statutory pre-emption right of the tenant of agricultural real estate had been diminishing over the years. The position of the lessee of agricultural land in terms of purchasing agricultural land is weakening. Currently, in practice, tenants may rarely use the pre-emption right. The author proposed the introduction of a provision to the Act on Shaping the Agricultural System on an additional consent of the National Support Centre for Agriculture for the sale of real estate under a lease.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document