First minister (prime minister) of the Fifth French Republic: Between the significant constitutional position and the prevailing practice in the shadow of the head of state

One of the characteristics of the system of government in the Fifth French Republic is the strengthened position of the head of state, but also the existence of the first minister as a constitutional category with a significant role. The constitution provides the political responsibility of the government with the Prime Minister and ministers before parliament. Certain French writers have opinion that the Prime Minister appears as the central figure of the constitutional structure. The Prime Minister shall direct the actions of the Government. This is 21 of Constitution. Also, there are specific powers that put the Prime Minister in the position of its real head of government. Among the prime minister's most important powers is his right to elect members of the government. It is the right to propose to the President of the Republic the appointment but also the dismissal of members of the government. The Prime Minister is authorized to re-sign certain acts of the President of the Republic. In case of temporary impediment of the head of state, the Prime Minister chairs the councils and committees for national defense, as well as the Council of Ministers. The paper analyzes the constitutional provisions that lead to the conclusion that the position of the Prime Minister is institutionally constructed as strong. Political practice, with the exception of periods of cohabitation, has indicated that most prime ministers have been overshadowed by mostly powerful heads of state. For that reason, it is necessary to analyze the political practice of all eight presidential governments. A review of the already long political life that has lasted since 1958. points to the conclusion that in its longest period, presidents of the Republic dominated the public political scene. The Prime Minister has a more pronounced role in the executive branch during cohabitation periods. However, nine years in three cohabitations cannot change the central conclusion of this paper that the dominant political practice of the Fifth Republic has led to the Prime Minister being essentially in the shadow of the head of state.

Legal-historical overview of the protection of homestead (farmer's minimum) in Serbian law

The subject of this analysis is the protection of homestead (farmer's minimum), from when it was introduced into Serbian law until the Second World War. The regulation about prohibiting debt collection of the peasant cover the essential part of his homestead, was introduced into Serbian law in the year 1836. It was necessary to prescribe the protection of the homestead, because the peasants borrowed from the usurers and thus lost their house and the last piece of land. That protection of the farmer's house and a few days of land became an integral part of Serbia's legal identity. The regulation about prohibiting debt collection of the peasant cover the essential part of his homestead did not exist in all parts of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. Because of that, when the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was founded, the unification of laws became a priority task of the government. In this regard, a rich debate developed, which lasted until the Second World War.

Right of apartment/condominium owners on the land on which the building is located in the context of conversion of the right of use into the right of ownership on the construction land

Initially the paper recalls that the apartment/condominium ownership is a complex legal construct, which, as a special form of ownership, is the legal institute of modern age. Thereupon, the reasons underlying its legal recognition and widespread use have been indicated, taking into account its deviations from the general ownership regime. Complexity of the apartment/condominium ownership stems from its specific object. Namely, three components of this legal construct: the right on the separate unite of the building (which could be in the the exclusive ownership, co-ownership or in joint ownership), the right on the joint parts of the building (in joint ownership of apartment owners), and the right on the land on which the building is located (in co-ownership of apartment owners), should be normatively shaped and systematically coordinated. Special attention has been paid to the right on the land, from the viewpoint of its peculiarity during the development of a legal system in Serbia after the World War II. The process of conversion, i.e. transformation of the right of use into the right of ownership in Serbia has begun in 2009 by entering into force of the still applicable Planning and Building Act. Evolution of the regulation of the rights of apartment/condominium owners on the land on which the building was erected (including the land which serves for its regular use), from 2009 to 2020, has been examined in detail in the light of its adequacy and capacity to contribute to the (re)establishing of the legal unity of the immovable property, as well as to the prevention of contentious situations.

Revocation of will and judicial proceedings for declaring a will ineffective under the Law on Inheritance of Serbia with reference to other contemporary European legal systems

In Serbian law, a valid will can be revoked based on the will of the testator, more precisely through the revocation of the will or based on a court decision. This paper analyzes the solutions of the Law on Inheritance of Serbia, dedicated to the mentioned ways of revoking a last will, and at the same time examines the legal regulation of that issue in other legal systems in Europe. The author finds that in the realization of the right to revoke a will, the legislation of Serbia undoubtedly affirms the freedom of will, and that in that respect, it is in principle harmonized with the legal solutions observed on European legal soil. In the aspect of the purpose for which it is prescribed, a special advantage of domestic regulation is the possibility of declaring a will ineffective through a court decision. The author further considers that certain solutions that can be found in comparative law, such as the possibility to invalidate testamentary dispositions made in favour of former spouse, could be accepted in Serbian inheritance law as well. Finally, according to the author, some existing legal solutions dedicated to the revocation of wills, need to be specified and completed de lege ferenda, in order to achieve legal certainty.

Nezakoniti upravni akti

U domaćoj nauci upravnog prava, po ugledu na nemačku i austrijsku, nezakoniti upravni akti tradicionalno se dele na ništave i rušljive. Podela, međutim, otkriva mnoge nelogičnosti. Osnovni problem proizlazi iz pitanja da li ništavi upravni akti imaju pravno dejstvo, na koje autori odgovaraju protivrečno. Razlog je jednostavan: svoje stavove ne zasnivaju u dovoljnoj meri na važećem pravu. Isuviše se oslanjaju na istoimenu građanskopravnu podelu pravnih poslova, koja nije primerena upravnom pravu i pravnoj prirodi upravnog akta. S obzirom na to da u našem pravu ništavi upravni akti imaju pravno dejstvo, podela gubi svoj izvorni, građanskopravni smisao. Bez njega, ona više ni nema smisla - više je štetna nego korisna. Iz važećeg prava osnovano može da se izvede samo jedna specifična kategorija upravnih akata, uslovno nazvanih ništavim. To su upravni akti sa najtežim povredama zakona, zbog kojih mogu uvek da se uklone iz pravnog poretka. Pokušaj da se naspram njih postave svi ostali upravni akti, nazvani rušljivim, nije logički ispravan i ne može dosledno da se sprovede ni po jednom kriterijumu - naročito ne po onom građanskopravnom.