scholarly journals Instytucja niesłusznego zbogacenia w polskim Kodeksie zobowiązań z 1933 roku na tle współczesnych kodyfikacji

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-328
Author(s):  
Jan Halberda ◽  

THE UNJUST ENRICHMENT AS REGULATED IN THE CODE OF OBLIGATIOON OF 1933 AND COMPARED WITH SIMILAR SOLUTIONS FOUND IN THE OTHER CODES F THE TIME The paper discusses the unjust enrichmennt as found in the Polish Code of Obligations of 1933. The discussion is conducted in a comparative way and makes allusions to other regulations of the time (those detectable in the ABGB, Code Civil, BGB, Obligationenrecht). It also makes reference to the solution accepted in the Polish Civil Code of 1964. What was discussed was the very construction of unjust enrichment as found in the aforementioned regulations (1), grounds for the claims (2), the scope within which the duty to return the enrichment applied (3), the nature of the claim – whether it was autonomous or subsidiary (4). In his final remarks, the author tried to assess the discussed institution as regulated in the Code of Obligations (5).

Prawo ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 321 ◽  
pp. 229-265
Author(s):  
Leonard Górnicki

Legal regulations of private partnerships in the Second Polish Republic following the partition periodThe author analyses the institution of private partnership in the Second Polish Republic from the entry into force in 1934 of the Polish Code of Obligations. He examines post-partition civil law in force in the central part of Poland and in Poland’s Eastern Borderlands, later in the southern part of Poland, and finally in the Western Territories. Thus he presents private partnership in Code civil des Français, also known as Code Napoléon — Napoleonic Code of 1804; in Svod Zakonov Rossiyskoy Imperii of 1832 in its 1914 edition with amendments and supplements; in Allgemeines Bürgerlisches Gesetzbuch ABGB, i.e. the Austrian Civil Code of 1811, with amendments; and the German Civil Code of 1896 — Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch BGB.The author’s objective is to demonstrate similarities and differences in the legal constructs of private partnership in the foreign legislation temporarily kept in force in Poland, emphasising the differences that constituted areal challenge for Polish codifiers in the Second Polish Republic. The article presents ahistorical-legal perspective and emphasises the significance of the author’s analysis of post-partition regulations of private partnerships in the Second Polish Republic to research into the current legislation in Poland in this respect. Juridical constructs as well as the content of the current regulations point to influences primarily of German legislation but also Austrian, French and Swiss legislations, with an evolution of views expressed in case-law and the doctrine, both Polish and foreign. Gesetzliche Regelungen zur Gesellschaft bürgerlichen Rechts nach den Gesetzgebungen der Nachteilungszeit in der Zweiten Polnischen RepublikIm Artikel wurde die Institution der Gesellschaft bürgerlichen Rechts in der Zweiten Polnischen Republik bis zum Inkrafttreten des polnischen Schuldrechtsbuches im Jahre 1934 analysiert. Der Autor befasste sich mit der Gesetzgebung der Nachteilungszeit, die auf den zentralen Gebieten und im Ostpolen, dann auf den südlichen Gebieten, d.h. in Kleinpolen und im Teschener Schlesien sowie in den Westgebieten galt. Er stellte daher der Reihe nach die Gesellschaft bürgerlichen Rechts im Code civil des Français auch Code Napoléon genannt — dem Kodex Napoleons aus dem Jahre 1804, im Swod Zakonow Rossijskoj Imperii aus dem Jahre 1832, nach der Ausgabe von 1914 mitsamt der Änderungen und Ergänzungen, im Allgemeinen Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch ABGB, d.h. dem österreichischen Zivilgesetzbuch aus dem Jahre 1811, mit Änderungen und im deutschen Zivilgesetzbuch aus dem Jahre 1896 — dem Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch BGB dar.Ziel des Autors war, auf die Ähnlichkeiten und Unterschiede in der rechtlichen Konstruktion der Gesellschaft bürgerlichen Rechts in der zeitweilig in Polen in Kraft bleibenden fremden Gesetzgebung hinzuweisen, mit nachdrücklicher Hervorhebung dieser Unterschiede, die eine wahre Aufforderung für die polnischen Kodifikatoren in der Zweiten Polnischen Republik darstellten.Der Artikel hebt sowohl die geschichtsrechtliche Perspektive hervor, als auch betont den erkenntnisreichen Inhalt der durchgeführten Analyse der nachteilungszeitlichen rechtlichen Regulierung der Institution der Gesellschaft bürgerlichen Rechts in der Zweiten Polnischen Republik für die Forschungen über die aktuelle diesbezügliche Rechtslage in Polen. Die juridischen Konstruktionen und der Inhalt der derzeit geltenden Vorschriften zeigen Einflüsse vor allem der deutschen Gesetzgebung, aber auch der österreichischen, französischen und sogar der schweizerischen mitsamt der Evolution der Ansichten der Rechtsprechung und der Rechtsdoktrin, sowohl der fremden, wie auch der polnischen.


2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-95
Author(s):  
Jan Halberda ◽  

Undue Payment in the Polish Code of Obligations of 1933 as Compared with Other Regulations of That Time The present paper discusses the concept of undue payment as found in the Polish Code of Obligations of 1933. The research is comparative in nature since it also explores the institution in question in other contemporary codes (Code Civil, ABGB, BGB and Obligationrecht), Roman law, and the Polish Civil Code of 1964 (1). The discussion is concerned with the framework of legal provisions on undue payment in the aforementioned sources (2). Furthermore, while applying a framework of the Roman condictiones the paper analyses the grounds of the action (3). It presents circumstances which allowed a payor to seek recovery of his payment (4–6) and those which precluded the claim (7). Then the paper gives an illustration of the scope of a payee’s liability (8). In his fi nal remarks, the author attempts to assess undue payment as regulated in the Code of Obligations (9).


Prawo ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 324 ◽  
pp. 211-228
Author(s):  
Łukasz Baszak

Cancellation of donation in the Polish Code of Obligations of 1933The article provides an analysis of the provisions of the Polish Code of Obligations of 1933 concerning cancellation of donation. The author discusses the provisions of Articles 364–369 of the Code, taking into account the impact of the various donation cancellation provisions included in regional codes and in other civil codes, i.e. the German Civil Code of 1896; Austrian Civil Code of 1811; Napoleonic Code of 1804; volume X, part 1 of the Russian Svod Zakonov Rossiyskoy Imperii of 1832; Swiss obligation law of 1911 and the draft Russian law of obligations of 1913.He also compares the final versions of the articles with their versions from the draft law of obligations by Dr Ernest Till and Prof Roman Longchamps de Berier, who were members of the Codification Commission. In addition, the author cites selected judgements of the Supreme Court dealing with the matter.Der Widerruf einer Schenkung im polnischen Schuldrechtsbuch aus dem Jahre 1933Der Aufsatz stellt die Beschlüsse des polnischen Schuldrechtsbuches aus dem Jahre 1933 be­treffend den Widerruf einer Schenkung dar. Besprochen wurden daher die Vorschriften der Artikel 364–369 dieses Gesetzbuches. Die Bestimmungen der einzelnen Artikel betreffend diese Institution wurden unter Berücksichtigung des Einflusses der einzelnen Vorschriften betreffend den Widerruf einer Schenkung, die in den Gesetzbüchern der Teilungsgebiete und in anderen Zivilgesetzbüchern, d.h. im deutschen Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch BGB aus dem Jahre 1896, im österreichischen Allgemeinen Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch ABGB aus dem Jahre 1811, im Napoleons Code civil aus dem Jahre 1804, im Buch 10 Teil I des russischen Swod Zakonow Rossijskoj Imperii aus dem Jahre 1832 sowie dem schweizerischen Obligationsrecht in der Fassung von 1911 und im Entwurf des russi­schen Verpflichtungsrechtes aus dem Jahre 1913 analysiert.Der letzte Wortlaut der einzelnen Artikel wurde auch mit ihrer Formulierung im einführenden Entwurf des Schuldrechtes von Prof. Dr. Ernst Till und Prof. Dr. Roman Longchamps de Berier, den Mitgliedern der Kodifikationskommission verglichen. Ergänzend zu der Analyse der einzelnen Vorschriften über den Widerruf einer Schenkung nannte der Autor auch ausgewählte Beschlüsse des Obersten Gerichtes aus diesem Bereich.


2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (Special Issue) ◽  
pp. 63-94
Author(s):  
Jan Halberda

The present paper discusses the concept of undue payment as found in the Polish Code of Obligations of 1933. The research is comparative in nature since it also explores the institution in question in other contemporary codes (Code Civil, ABGB, BGB and Obligationrecht), Roman law, and the Polish Civil Code of 1964 (1). The discussion is concerned with the framework of legal provisions on undue payment in the aforementioned sources (2). Furthermore, while applying a framework of the Roman condictiones the paper analyses the grounds of the action (3). It presents circumstances which allowed a payor to seek recovery of his payment (4–6) and those which precluded the claim (7). Then the paper gives an illustration of the scope of a payee’s liability (8). In his final remarks, the author attempts to assess undue payment as regulated in the Code of Obligations (9).


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 78
Author(s):  
Dija Hedistira ◽  
' Pujiyono

<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>


2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-46
Author(s):  
Florian Mächtel

In its § 142(1) theAmerican Restatement of the Law of Restitutionprovides that “[t]he right of a person to restitution from another because of a benefit received is terminated or diminished if, after the receipt of the benefit, circumstances have so changed that it would be inequitable to require the other to make full restitution.” The notion that the recipient of an unjustified benefit must in principle return not more than the enrichment that has actually “survived” in his hands, is not only fundamental to the American law of restitution, but can also be found in English and German law.


Author(s):  
Iosif Florin Moldovan

The matrimonial regime represents the entirety of the legal provisions concerning theproperty relations between spouses during marriage, as well as the legal documents theyconclude with other people, governing a (measurable) patrimonial asset.In addition to the legal community regime, with the adoption of the new RomanianCivil Code two new matrimonial regimes were introduced, namely the regime of propertyseparation and the regime of the conventional community.Where the two spouses opt for one of the other two regimes, instead of the legalcommunity regime, it is necessary that they should sign a marital agreement.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Fransisca Kusuma Aryani ◽  
Gunawan Djajaputra

The process of granting credit with the guarantee of Mortgage Rights experienced many obstacles, one of which is the cancellation of credit agreement due to a lawsuit from a third party. Examples of problems that will researchers take is a case between PT PNM as creditor and Erlinawati as a debtor. Erlinawati applied for credit to PT PNM and pledged SHM No. 1716 without her husband's agreement, Bagus Satriya. As time went by, Erlinawati could not fulfill its obligations as stipulated in the credit agreement, and then PT PNM sent a warning letter to Erlinawati. Good people who know the land and buildings of his property are used as a direct guarantee to file a lawsuit to the Blora District Court. The Blora District Court ruled that credit agreements and Deed of Mortgage Rights (APHT) are invalid and null and void. So far the legal protection for debtors who have sued from the other party on the guarantee given by the creditor has not been regulated specially in the legislation. The law only regulates bad debts and debt repayment through the execution process stipulated in the Law on Banking and Insurance Rights Act. Legal protection that creditor can use when obtaining a lawsuit from a third party is by using the general guarantees provided for in Articles 1131 and 1132 of the Civil Code.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (69) ◽  
pp. 39-63
Author(s):  
Aldona Rita Jurewicz

The paper discusses the 2nd working draft of government’s bill of reform of Guardianship Law (2. Diskussionteilentwurf ). The fundamental concept of the reform is an overall remodeling of the legal structure of the Civil Code regulations, de-bureaucratization of the requirements regarding custody of the ward’s property, his/her empowerment, introduction of the privilege to choose a non-compensated Guardian before the other types of Guardians with the simultaneous abolition of the subsidiarity principle and the cancellation of the Gegenvormund institution (a form of control authority for the supervision of Guardian).


Author(s):  
Alesya V. Demkina ◽  

The article deals with the relatively new rules of Art. 434.1 the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on the conduct of negotiations. Taking into account the current wording of the said rule and the experience of foreign legislation on pre-contractual liability, the article argues for different theories justifying the nature of pre-contractual legal relations and liability and gives different positions of the authors on this issue. Proceeding from the doctrinal concept of obligation and characteristics of pre-contractual relations themselves the conclusion is made that these relations, firstly, are regulated by law and, secondly, they are not simply a legal relation but an obligation. It is based on certain actions of the negotiating partners that give rise to such an obliga-tion. As such, any action that is sufficiently certain (in some cases it may be required by law) and expresses the intention of the person to regard himself as negotiating with the addressee, who will in return perform the same sufficiently certain action, can be regarded as such. The specified characteristics of an action allow us to conclude that, from the point of view of classification of legal facts, this action is an act (because it is performed with a certain in-tention evident to other participants of civil turnover) and, moreover, it is also a transaction. Special rules of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation stipulate that the actions performed to enter into negotiations (for example, if the conclusion of a contract is binding on one party) or the actions of both partners entail legal consequences - the obligation to negotiate in good faith. The analysis of these legal relationships identifies three stages in their development, charac-terises them and attempts to answer more precisely the question of who can be a participant in the negotiation process depending on the stage of the negotiation process. The subject matter of an obligation arising during pre-contractual contacts will be actions aimed at negotiating and concluding a contract. The content of the obligation arising in the course of pre-contractual contacts, based on Art. 434.1 of the Civil Code will be the obligation to negotiate in good faith (paragraph 2 of the above rule). Assuming that the legislator provides an indicative list of actions that should fall within the scope of bad faith conduct, an indicative list of the "standard" of good faith conduct at the negotiation stage is given. This includes the obligation to provide full and truthful information to a party, including the reporting of circumstances that, due to the nature of the contract, must be brought to the attention of the other party (e.g. in a sale, all encumbrances on the subject of the contract must be reported). In addition, persons are obliged to negotiate only if they intend to conclude a contract, not to terminate negotiations suddenly and unjustifiably, and to take into account the rights and legitimate interests of the other party to the negotiation. The obligation under this obligation may also include a requirement not to disclose infor-mation obtained during the negotiation of the contract.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document