Janković, Svetislav

Link to this page

Authority KeyName Variants
orcid::0009-0007-2279-9975
  • Janković, Svetislav (15)
  • Janković, Svetislav Đ (1)
Projects

Author's Bibliography

(Ne)izvesnost cene putne karte u vazdušnom saobraćaju

Janković, Svetislav

(Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd, 2022)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2022
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1372
AB  - U radu se razmatra neizvesnost koju trpe potrošači pri kupovini avio-karata. Ona se ispoljava u dva oblika. Prvo, kao nedorečenost u ceni karte prilikom njene kupovine, tako što se u početnim koracima kupovine ističe jedna cena, a docnije, pri neposrednom zaključenju ugovora, potrošaču se predočava druga, konačna cena uvećana najčešće za naknade za registrovani prtljag, obroke u toku leta i osiguranje. Drugi oblik neizvesnosti postoji kada je prevoz vazduhoplovom sastavni deo složenijeg ugovora o organizovanju putovanja. Tada je moguće da se poveća ukupna cena čitavog paket aranžmana zbog povećanja cene prevoza, najčešće iz razloga promena na tržištu nafte. Zaključuje se da su oba povećanja cene karte neopravdana, s obzirom na to da stvaraju neizvesnost na strani potrošača, iako je drugi oblik pravno uređen, i najčešće nedvosmisleno predočen korisniku.
AB  - In the article, the author considers the uncertainty in the price of air tickets which is manifested in two ways. The first one is difficulty in cognition of real price of ticket due to many of advertising methods which are aimed to attract as many as possible new passengers. Usually, the price at the beginning of the process of purchasing the ticket is much lower than the final price at the end of the process of its purchase. The second example of uncertainty is present in the package tour arrangement where is possible to increase the overall price due to reasons on the carrier's side (usually due to an increase in the price of fuel). The author concludes that both of the aforementioned occasions of increasing the price of the tickets are unacceptable because of protecting reasons of consumers.
PB  - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
T2  - Pravo i privreda
T1  - (Ne)izvesnost cene putne karte u vazdušnom saobraćaju
T1  - (Un)certainty in the price of air ticket
EP  - 498
IS  - 3
SP  - 478
VL  - 60
DO  - 10.55836/PiP_22304A
UR  - conv_2365
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2022",
abstract = "U radu se razmatra neizvesnost koju trpe potrošači pri kupovini avio-karata. Ona se ispoljava u dva oblika. Prvo, kao nedorečenost u ceni karte prilikom njene kupovine, tako što se u početnim koracima kupovine ističe jedna cena, a docnije, pri neposrednom zaključenju ugovora, potrošaču se predočava druga, konačna cena uvećana najčešće za naknade za registrovani prtljag, obroke u toku leta i osiguranje. Drugi oblik neizvesnosti postoji kada je prevoz vazduhoplovom sastavni deo složenijeg ugovora o organizovanju putovanja. Tada je moguće da se poveća ukupna cena čitavog paket aranžmana zbog povećanja cene prevoza, najčešće iz razloga promena na tržištu nafte. Zaključuje se da su oba povećanja cene karte neopravdana, s obzirom na to da stvaraju neizvesnost na strani potrošača, iako je drugi oblik pravno uređen, i najčešće nedvosmisleno predočen korisniku., In the article, the author considers the uncertainty in the price of air tickets which is manifested in two ways. The first one is difficulty in cognition of real price of ticket due to many of advertising methods which are aimed to attract as many as possible new passengers. Usually, the price at the beginning of the process of purchasing the ticket is much lower than the final price at the end of the process of its purchase. The second example of uncertainty is present in the package tour arrangement where is possible to increase the overall price due to reasons on the carrier's side (usually due to an increase in the price of fuel). The author concludes that both of the aforementioned occasions of increasing the price of the tickets are unacceptable because of protecting reasons of consumers.",
publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Pravo i privreda",
title = "(Ne)izvesnost cene putne karte u vazdušnom saobraćaju, (Un)certainty in the price of air ticket",
pages = "498-478",
number = "3",
volume = "60",
doi = "10.55836/PiP_22304A",
url = "conv_2365"
}
Janković, S.. (2022). (Ne)izvesnost cene putne karte u vazdušnom saobraćaju. in Pravo i privreda
Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 60(3), 478-498.
https://doi.org/10.55836/PiP_22304A
conv_2365
Janković S. (Ne)izvesnost cene putne karte u vazdušnom saobraćaju. in Pravo i privreda. 2022;60(3):478-498.
doi:10.55836/PiP_22304A
conv_2365 .
Janković, Svetislav, "(Ne)izvesnost cene putne karte u vazdušnom saobraćaju" in Pravo i privreda, 60, no. 3 (2022):478-498,
https://doi.org/10.55836/PiP_22304A .,
conv_2365 .

Pravne posledice poremećaja u putničkom avio-saobraćaju nastalih usled Covid-19

Janković, Svetislav

(Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd, 2021)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2021
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1245
AB  - U radu se razmatra pravni režim odgovornosti avio-prevozioca u slučaju krize izazvane korona virusom. Težište razmatranja je na poremećajima u saobraćaju koji se izražavaju najčešće kroz otkazivanje letova i pravima koje putnici imaju u takvim situacijama. Osnovni problem predstavlja pravno kvalifikovanje korona krize i shodno tome konačno određivanje obima i vrste putničkih prava. Zaključuje se da korona kriza predstavlja svojevrsnu društvenu višu silu, posebno imajući u vidu državne mere kojima se ograničava kretanje stanovništva, a što neposredno utiče na otkazivanje letova. Kako bi se prava putnika učinila izvesnijim u takvim situacijama, na nivou područja "Evropskog neba" je usvojeno zvanično Tumačenje kojim se potvrđuje da putnici kao potrošači uvek imaju pravo da izaberu da raskidaju ugovor koji je neizvršen usled pandemijskog razloga i da, prema tome, imaju pravo na povraćaj cene putne karte.
AB  - In the article, the author considers special legal regime of liability of an air carrier in the circumstances of the corona pandemic. Author is focused on the air traffic's disturbances which are, mainly, manifested in the cancellation of flight and, consequently, to the appropriate rights of passengers. Th e basic problem which is targeted by the author is the legal qualification of the corona crisis and, in short, deciding whether corona crisis has an attribute of force majeure. It has been derived a conclusion about corona crisis as some kind of social force majeure, especially having regard to state's measures of limiting of movement of people across the border. In order to make passengers rights in these circumstances more certain, the European Commission enacted the official interpretation of the several regulations which are dedicated to rights of passengers. Th e most important right in that official interpreted act is the right to reimbursement which in a concrete sense, means to return sum which passenger previously paid for a ticket.
PB  - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
T2  - Pravo i privreda
T1  - Pravne posledice poremećaja u putničkom avio-saobraćaju nastalih usled Covid-19
T1  - Legal consequences of the disturbances in air traffic caused by the Covid-19 crisis
EP  - 539
IS  - 4
SP  - 523
VL  - 59
DO  - 10.5937/PiP2104523J
UR  - conv_2350
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2021",
abstract = "U radu se razmatra pravni režim odgovornosti avio-prevozioca u slučaju krize izazvane korona virusom. Težište razmatranja je na poremećajima u saobraćaju koji se izražavaju najčešće kroz otkazivanje letova i pravima koje putnici imaju u takvim situacijama. Osnovni problem predstavlja pravno kvalifikovanje korona krize i shodno tome konačno određivanje obima i vrste putničkih prava. Zaključuje se da korona kriza predstavlja svojevrsnu društvenu višu silu, posebno imajući u vidu državne mere kojima se ograničava kretanje stanovništva, a što neposredno utiče na otkazivanje letova. Kako bi se prava putnika učinila izvesnijim u takvim situacijama, na nivou područja "Evropskog neba" je usvojeno zvanično Tumačenje kojim se potvrđuje da putnici kao potrošači uvek imaju pravo da izaberu da raskidaju ugovor koji je neizvršen usled pandemijskog razloga i da, prema tome, imaju pravo na povraćaj cene putne karte., In the article, the author considers special legal regime of liability of an air carrier in the circumstances of the corona pandemic. Author is focused on the air traffic's disturbances which are, mainly, manifested in the cancellation of flight and, consequently, to the appropriate rights of passengers. Th e basic problem which is targeted by the author is the legal qualification of the corona crisis and, in short, deciding whether corona crisis has an attribute of force majeure. It has been derived a conclusion about corona crisis as some kind of social force majeure, especially having regard to state's measures of limiting of movement of people across the border. In order to make passengers rights in these circumstances more certain, the European Commission enacted the official interpretation of the several regulations which are dedicated to rights of passengers. Th e most important right in that official interpreted act is the right to reimbursement which in a concrete sense, means to return sum which passenger previously paid for a ticket.",
publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Pravo i privreda",
title = "Pravne posledice poremećaja u putničkom avio-saobraćaju nastalih usled Covid-19, Legal consequences of the disturbances in air traffic caused by the Covid-19 crisis",
pages = "539-523",
number = "4",
volume = "59",
doi = "10.5937/PiP2104523J",
url = "conv_2350"
}
Janković, S.. (2021). Pravne posledice poremećaja u putničkom avio-saobraćaju nastalih usled Covid-19. in Pravo i privreda
Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 59(4), 523-539.
https://doi.org/10.5937/PiP2104523J
conv_2350
Janković S. Pravne posledice poremećaja u putničkom avio-saobraćaju nastalih usled Covid-19. in Pravo i privreda. 2021;59(4):523-539.
doi:10.5937/PiP2104523J
conv_2350 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Pravne posledice poremećaja u putničkom avio-saobraćaju nastalih usled Covid-19" in Pravo i privreda, 59, no. 4 (2021):523-539,
https://doi.org/10.5937/PiP2104523J .,
conv_2350 .

Pravni (be)značaj pokrića kod menice i čeka

Janković, Svetislav

(Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd, 2020)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2020
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1228
AB  - S obzirom na to da imaju istovetnu personalnu strukturu, menica i ček, i pored razlika u pogledu svrhe (plaćanje, obezbeđenje, kreditiranje), imaju zajedničku osobinu u pogledu trasantovog pokrića kod trasata. Čini se da je postojanje pokrića pravno nevažno za položaj trasata i akceptanta. Za razliku od trasata koji nema obavezu isplate, akceptant je ima, ali se obojici pravni položaj određuje ne spram pokrića, nego spram sopstvenog pristanka na ustanovljavanje obaveze. Dok trasat (kako kod menice, tako i kod čeka) ne daje pristanak na trasantov nalog, dotle ga akceptant (kod menice) daje, stvarajući za sebe obavezu isplate koja je samostalna i nezavisna od pokrića. U prvom delu rada, menica i ček se funkcionalno određuju u vezi sa ugovorom o prodaji i asignacijom. Zatim se razmatra apstraktnost u građanskom pravu, a posebno povezanost ustanove stipulacije (iz starog rimskog prava) i menične radnje akceptiranja. Naposletku, prikazuje se odnos osnovnih meničnih lica prema pokriću.
AB  - Due to the identical personal structure, the bill of exchange and the cheque have a common feature regarding the drawer's cover on a banking account which is administrated by the drawee. It seems that sufficiency of adequate funds, which should cover the drawer's order from these instruments, doesn't have any legal significance for the drawee and the acceptor. At first glance the position of drawee and acceptor is different because the drawee's obligation is also not derived from the bill of exchange; however, the acceptor has an obligation due to his acceptance of the drawer's order. However, at the stage of collection, drawee and acceptor have a similar position regarding financial cover by drawer's account. Regardless of whether there is financial coverage, the legal position of the drawee and acceptor remains unchanged, because their position could be changed only through their legally relevant will, manifested in the instrument as such.
PB  - Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd
T2  - Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
T1  - Pravni (be)značaj pokrića kod menice i čeka
T1  - The legal insignificance of the financial coverage at the bill of exchange and the cheque
EP  - 178
IS  - 3
SP  - 159
VL  - 68
DO  - 10.5937/AnaliPFB2003172J
UR  - conv_525
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2020",
abstract = "S obzirom na to da imaju istovetnu personalnu strukturu, menica i ček, i pored razlika u pogledu svrhe (plaćanje, obezbeđenje, kreditiranje), imaju zajedničku osobinu u pogledu trasantovog pokrića kod trasata. Čini se da je postojanje pokrića pravno nevažno za položaj trasata i akceptanta. Za razliku od trasata koji nema obavezu isplate, akceptant je ima, ali se obojici pravni položaj određuje ne spram pokrića, nego spram sopstvenog pristanka na ustanovljavanje obaveze. Dok trasat (kako kod menice, tako i kod čeka) ne daje pristanak na trasantov nalog, dotle ga akceptant (kod menice) daje, stvarajući za sebe obavezu isplate koja je samostalna i nezavisna od pokrića. U prvom delu rada, menica i ček se funkcionalno određuju u vezi sa ugovorom o prodaji i asignacijom. Zatim se razmatra apstraktnost u građanskom pravu, a posebno povezanost ustanove stipulacije (iz starog rimskog prava) i menične radnje akceptiranja. Naposletku, prikazuje se odnos osnovnih meničnih lica prema pokriću., Due to the identical personal structure, the bill of exchange and the cheque have a common feature regarding the drawer's cover on a banking account which is administrated by the drawee. It seems that sufficiency of adequate funds, which should cover the drawer's order from these instruments, doesn't have any legal significance for the drawee and the acceptor. At first glance the position of drawee and acceptor is different because the drawee's obligation is also not derived from the bill of exchange; however, the acceptor has an obligation due to his acceptance of the drawer's order. However, at the stage of collection, drawee and acceptor have a similar position regarding financial cover by drawer's account. Regardless of whether there is financial coverage, the legal position of the drawee and acceptor remains unchanged, because their position could be changed only through their legally relevant will, manifested in the instrument as such.",
publisher = "Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd",
journal = "Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu",
title = "Pravni (be)značaj pokrića kod menice i čeka, The legal insignificance of the financial coverage at the bill of exchange and the cheque",
pages = "178-159",
number = "3",
volume = "68",
doi = "10.5937/AnaliPFB2003172J",
url = "conv_525"
}
Janković, S.. (2020). Pravni (be)značaj pokrića kod menice i čeka. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd., 68(3), 159-178.
https://doi.org/10.5937/AnaliPFB2003172J
conv_525
Janković S. Pravni (be)značaj pokrića kod menice i čeka. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu. 2020;68(3):159-178.
doi:10.5937/AnaliPFB2003172J
conv_525 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Pravni (be)značaj pokrića kod menice i čeka" in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, 68, no. 3 (2020):159-178,
https://doi.org/10.5937/AnaliPFB2003172J .,
conv_525 .

Pravni položaj vozača u Uber sistemu prevoza putnika

Janković, Svetislav

(Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd, 2020)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2020
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1205
AB  - U radu se razmatra pravni položaj vozača u odnosu na korisnika usluge prevoza, ali i spram uber-a, kao organizatora tržišta prevoza i samog prevozioca, odnosno špeditera. Vozačev položaj je u velikoj meri određen pravnom prirodom uber-ovog položaja po principu mehanizma "klackalice" - ako je uber posrednik, onda je vozač prevozilac, i suprotno - ako je uber prevozilac, onda je vozač njegov pomoćnik. Takođe, ako se vozač odredi kao prevozilac, onda je nejasno da li je on javni ili privatni prevozilac, imajući u vidu (ne)određenost kruga korisnika usluge prevoza. U prvom delu rada je prikazan uticaj ekonomije deljenja i tehničkog napretka na stvaranje novih oblika prevoza. Zatim je ukazano na pravni problem novog načina organizovanja usluge prevoza, kao i pravne kvalifikacije osnovnih lica u njemu (pre svega, vozača i uber-a, ali i korisnika kao potrošača). Najzad, na kraju se u okviru zaključka vozač određuje prevoziočevim pomoćnikom, dok se njegov položaj zaposlenog kod prevozioca i dalje čini spornim.
AB  - In the article, the author considers a legal position of a driver in relation to a transport service user and in relation to uber as a transport market maker and transporter, respectively freight forwarder. The driver's role in the uber system is largely determined with the legal nature of Uber's legal position by the principle of the seesaw toy. If uber has an intermediary role, then driver is a carrier, and vice versa, if uber has been deemed a carrier, then a driver has a role as a carrier's assistant. Also, if a driver has been considered as a carrier, then it is unclear whether he is a public or only a private carrier, having in mind an (in)definite number of users. In the first chapter of the article, the author explains the impact of the sharing economy and technical progress on creating a new mode of transport. Furthermore, the legal problem of the new way of providing a transport service has been highlighted, as well as a legal qualification of subjects involved in Uber's business structure. Finally, the author concludes that a driver should be deemed as a carrier's assistant, having in mind that uber as a carrier and as the organizer of the transport market has a decisive influence on the whole process of transporting a passenger (from the beginning phase to ending).
PB  - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
T2  - Pravo i privreda
T1  - Pravni položaj vozača u Uber sistemu prevoza putnika
T1  - The legal position of driver in the Uber transport of passengers
EP  - 219
IS  - 3
SP  - 201
VL  - 58
DO  - 10.5937/PiP2003201J
UR  - conv_2329
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2020",
abstract = "U radu se razmatra pravni položaj vozača u odnosu na korisnika usluge prevoza, ali i spram uber-a, kao organizatora tržišta prevoza i samog prevozioca, odnosno špeditera. Vozačev položaj je u velikoj meri određen pravnom prirodom uber-ovog položaja po principu mehanizma "klackalice" - ako je uber posrednik, onda je vozač prevozilac, i suprotno - ako je uber prevozilac, onda je vozač njegov pomoćnik. Takođe, ako se vozač odredi kao prevozilac, onda je nejasno da li je on javni ili privatni prevozilac, imajući u vidu (ne)određenost kruga korisnika usluge prevoza. U prvom delu rada je prikazan uticaj ekonomije deljenja i tehničkog napretka na stvaranje novih oblika prevoza. Zatim je ukazano na pravni problem novog načina organizovanja usluge prevoza, kao i pravne kvalifikacije osnovnih lica u njemu (pre svega, vozača i uber-a, ali i korisnika kao potrošača). Najzad, na kraju se u okviru zaključka vozač određuje prevoziočevim pomoćnikom, dok se njegov položaj zaposlenog kod prevozioca i dalje čini spornim., In the article, the author considers a legal position of a driver in relation to a transport service user and in relation to uber as a transport market maker and transporter, respectively freight forwarder. The driver's role in the uber system is largely determined with the legal nature of Uber's legal position by the principle of the seesaw toy. If uber has an intermediary role, then driver is a carrier, and vice versa, if uber has been deemed a carrier, then a driver has a role as a carrier's assistant. Also, if a driver has been considered as a carrier, then it is unclear whether he is a public or only a private carrier, having in mind an (in)definite number of users. In the first chapter of the article, the author explains the impact of the sharing economy and technical progress on creating a new mode of transport. Furthermore, the legal problem of the new way of providing a transport service has been highlighted, as well as a legal qualification of subjects involved in Uber's business structure. Finally, the author concludes that a driver should be deemed as a carrier's assistant, having in mind that uber as a carrier and as the organizer of the transport market has a decisive influence on the whole process of transporting a passenger (from the beginning phase to ending).",
publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Pravo i privreda",
title = "Pravni položaj vozača u Uber sistemu prevoza putnika, The legal position of driver in the Uber transport of passengers",
pages = "219-201",
number = "3",
volume = "58",
doi = "10.5937/PiP2003201J",
url = "conv_2329"
}
Janković, S.. (2020). Pravni položaj vozača u Uber sistemu prevoza putnika. in Pravo i privreda
Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 58(3), 201-219.
https://doi.org/10.5937/PiP2003201J
conv_2329
Janković S. Pravni položaj vozača u Uber sistemu prevoza putnika. in Pravo i privreda. 2020;58(3):201-219.
doi:10.5937/PiP2003201J
conv_2329 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Pravni položaj vozača u Uber sistemu prevoza putnika" in Pravo i privreda, 58, no. 3 (2020):201-219,
https://doi.org/10.5937/PiP2003201J .,
conv_2329 .

Pravni režim ugovora o drumskom prevozu putnika zaključenog putem internet platforme

Janković, Svetislav

(Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd, 2019)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2019
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1103
AB  - Razvoj računarskih tehnologija je omogućio brže i lakše povezivanje ljudi, pogotovo u saobraćaju. To se naročito ispoljilo kroz tzv. deobnu ekonomiju u kojoj se višak dobra (usluge) deli (uz naknadu) sa onima kojima je potrebniji.Takav ekonomski pristup je uspešno primenjen u uber-u u inostranstvu i CarGo u Srbiji, koji predstavljaju Internet aplikacije putem kojih se zaključuje ugovor o prevozu. Pri tome, sporna je pravna kvalifikacija ovakvog vida prevoza, jer, nije jasno da li se radi o javnom ili privatnom prevozu, kao i kakva je uloga Internet aplikacija u njihovom zaključenju i ispunjenju. Prema jednom mišljenju, radi se i klasičnom posredovanju, dok je prema drugom shvatanju, ipak, reč o prevozu (javnom). U prvom delu rada je prikazan uticaj tehničko-računarskog napretka na nastanak deobne ekonomije i, shodno tome, na saobraćajne odnose. U drugom delu se ukazuje na pravne probleme koji usled toga nastaju, a koje izaziva, pre svega, sličnost sa klasičnim taksi prevozom. Nakon prikaza pravnog režima taksi prevoza, objašnjava se način rada uber-a i CarGo-a, kao i njihova pravna priroda. Ukazuje se na nejasnoću pravnog oblika ovih internet aplikacija, s obzirom da je, posebno u Srbiji, sporno da li imaju pravni subjektivitet, te da li su privredno društvo ili udruženje. Zaključuje se da je pomenuta vrsta prevoza samo tehnički unapređeniji klasični tip vanlinijskog javnog prevoza čiju uslugu pruža subjekt koji, predstavlja kompaniju.
AB  - The development of technology, particularly computers, which enabled faster and easier connecting people, has deeply influenced to transportation, which as such has a meaning of connecting people and places. Such influence manifested through sharing economy whose rules enable that surplus of goods and services shares with those who needed it and who will use it in an optimal manner. The aforementioned economical mechanism has successfully applied to the uber as a best known ride-sharing service at international level and to the CarGo, which is, basically, similar to uber, and established and applied in Serbia and region. A Basic problem of uber and CarGo is the legal qualification of contract which is concluded by the help of its Internet application, because, firstly, it is not clear whether uber supplies carriage service or only intermediary service. And, secondly, if it supplies transport service, it is unclear whether such carriage is public (common carrier in Anglo-American meaning) or private. In this article, the author concludes that uber (CarGo in Serbia) is not a just intermediary providing so-called information society service, but a transport service provider. This conclusion author based on the argument that uber has the decisive and substantial influence to the carrier who directly supply transport service to the passenger. In the first part of article is analyzed the influence of technological development on transport and appearance of uber and similar services. Subsequently, the second part points to legal problems in the transport industry which evolved due to mentioned computerization and in relation to that similarity of uber and Taxi. Thereafter it is explained a working method of uber (and Cargo) and its legal nature (whether It is digital intermediation, classical carriage or rent of vehicle with driver analogously with charter party in Maritime Law). At the ending part, the author tries to find an exact legal shape for CarGo application in Serbia, because it is deeply doubted. At the beginning of the work of application, CarGo has not had any legal status, but from 2019 it shaped into a classical association of citizens. Applying the old principle "falsa nomination, non nocet", the author concludes that CarGo is no an association, but company with legal responsibility characteristic to private limited company.
PB  - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
T2  - Pravo i privreda
T1  - Pravni režim ugovora o drumskom prevozu putnika zaključenog putem internet platforme
T1  - The legal regime of contract for the carriage of passengers concluded by Internet application
EP  - 406
IS  - 7-9
SP  - 387
VL  - 57
UR  - conv_2301
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2019",
abstract = "Razvoj računarskih tehnologija je omogućio brže i lakše povezivanje ljudi, pogotovo u saobraćaju. To se naročito ispoljilo kroz tzv. deobnu ekonomiju u kojoj se višak dobra (usluge) deli (uz naknadu) sa onima kojima je potrebniji.Takav ekonomski pristup je uspešno primenjen u uber-u u inostranstvu i CarGo u Srbiji, koji predstavljaju Internet aplikacije putem kojih se zaključuje ugovor o prevozu. Pri tome, sporna je pravna kvalifikacija ovakvog vida prevoza, jer, nije jasno da li se radi o javnom ili privatnom prevozu, kao i kakva je uloga Internet aplikacija u njihovom zaključenju i ispunjenju. Prema jednom mišljenju, radi se i klasičnom posredovanju, dok je prema drugom shvatanju, ipak, reč o prevozu (javnom). U prvom delu rada je prikazan uticaj tehničko-računarskog napretka na nastanak deobne ekonomije i, shodno tome, na saobraćajne odnose. U drugom delu se ukazuje na pravne probleme koji usled toga nastaju, a koje izaziva, pre svega, sličnost sa klasičnim taksi prevozom. Nakon prikaza pravnog režima taksi prevoza, objašnjava se način rada uber-a i CarGo-a, kao i njihova pravna priroda. Ukazuje se na nejasnoću pravnog oblika ovih internet aplikacija, s obzirom da je, posebno u Srbiji, sporno da li imaju pravni subjektivitet, te da li su privredno društvo ili udruženje. Zaključuje se da je pomenuta vrsta prevoza samo tehnički unapređeniji klasični tip vanlinijskog javnog prevoza čiju uslugu pruža subjekt koji, predstavlja kompaniju., The development of technology, particularly computers, which enabled faster and easier connecting people, has deeply influenced to transportation, which as such has a meaning of connecting people and places. Such influence manifested through sharing economy whose rules enable that surplus of goods and services shares with those who needed it and who will use it in an optimal manner. The aforementioned economical mechanism has successfully applied to the uber as a best known ride-sharing service at international level and to the CarGo, which is, basically, similar to uber, and established and applied in Serbia and region. A Basic problem of uber and CarGo is the legal qualification of contract which is concluded by the help of its Internet application, because, firstly, it is not clear whether uber supplies carriage service or only intermediary service. And, secondly, if it supplies transport service, it is unclear whether such carriage is public (common carrier in Anglo-American meaning) or private. In this article, the author concludes that uber (CarGo in Serbia) is not a just intermediary providing so-called information society service, but a transport service provider. This conclusion author based on the argument that uber has the decisive and substantial influence to the carrier who directly supply transport service to the passenger. In the first part of article is analyzed the influence of technological development on transport and appearance of uber and similar services. Subsequently, the second part points to legal problems in the transport industry which evolved due to mentioned computerization and in relation to that similarity of uber and Taxi. Thereafter it is explained a working method of uber (and Cargo) and its legal nature (whether It is digital intermediation, classical carriage or rent of vehicle with driver analogously with charter party in Maritime Law). At the ending part, the author tries to find an exact legal shape for CarGo application in Serbia, because it is deeply doubted. At the beginning of the work of application, CarGo has not had any legal status, but from 2019 it shaped into a classical association of citizens. Applying the old principle "falsa nomination, non nocet", the author concludes that CarGo is no an association, but company with legal responsibility characteristic to private limited company.",
publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Pravo i privreda",
title = "Pravni režim ugovora o drumskom prevozu putnika zaključenog putem internet platforme, The legal regime of contract for the carriage of passengers concluded by Internet application",
pages = "406-387",
number = "7-9",
volume = "57",
url = "conv_2301"
}
Janković, S.. (2019). Pravni režim ugovora o drumskom prevozu putnika zaključenog putem internet platforme. in Pravo i privreda
Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 57(7-9), 387-406.
conv_2301
Janković S. Pravni režim ugovora o drumskom prevozu putnika zaključenog putem internet platforme. in Pravo i privreda. 2019;57(7-9):387-406.
conv_2301 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Pravni režim ugovora o drumskom prevozu putnika zaključenog putem internet platforme" in Pravo i privreda, 57, no. 7-9 (2019):387-406,
conv_2301 .

Neograničena odgovornost prevozioca

Janković, Svetislav

(Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd, 2018)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2018
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1014
AB  - Predmet razmatranja predstavlja neograničena odgovornost prevozioca u svim granama saobraćaja, kako u prevozu robe, tako i putnika. Razlog objedinjavajućeg pogleda na neograničenu odgovornost prevozioca sastoji se u istovetnosti uslova za takvu odgovornost. On se sastoji u neopravdano lošem ponašanju prevozioca u ispunjavanju svojih obaveza (namerno i krajnje nepažljivo prouzrokovanje štete). Tek ispunjenjem tog uslova, prevozilac (bilo koje saobraćajne grane) gubi pravo da ograniči svoju odgovornost. Ograničena odgovornost prevozioca se pretpostavlja i najčešće je u svom iznosu prilično ispod vrednosti predmeta prevoza. U počecima savremenog saobraćaja (20. vek), takva odgovornost je pravdana ekonomskom slabošću prevozilaca i tehničkom nerazvijenošću, ali je vremenom takvo stanje potpuno promenjeno, imajući u vidu da su prevozničke kompanije među najimućnijim, a i da je tehnika neslućeno napredovala. Zbog toga se zaključuje da bi bilo pravedno da prevozioci pretpostavljeno odgovaraju do vrednosti predmeta prevoza, a da se za štetu preko tog iznosa dokazuje prevoziočeva namera ili krajnja nepažnja u ispunjavanju obaveza. Prvi deo rada je posvećen objašnjenju pojma neograničene odgovornosti i objektivizaciji prevoziočeve odgovornosti kao pravilnosti u saobraćajnom pravu. Zatim se razmatra pravna važnost krivice prevozioca, posebno u pogledu njegove neograničene odgovornosti i, uopšte, kao mere njegove odgovornosti. Drugi deo rada je posvećen određivanju kruga lica čije se ponašanje poistovećuje sa prevoziočevim, odnosno koja mogu svojim namernim ili krajnje nepažljivim štetnim radnjama da dovedu prevozioca u položaj da neograničeno odgovara.
AB  - The author in this article analyses unlimited carrier's liability regarding not only to malicious behaviour of carrier in fulfilling obligations from contract of carriage (e.g. causing damage with intent, willful misconduct or recklessly), but also ordinary situation where, despite of non-fulfillment of contract, carrier's liability is limited. The core of this article is concentrated on the explanation of the link between strict carrier's liability and legal importance of degree of carrier's fault in non-fulfillment of contract. The author is on the standpoint that carrier should be liable limited, but not in amount below the value of goods, but in the amount equal to its market value. This liability regime is justified with the fact of high economic power of transport companies and developed technic in traffic and vehicles, which did not exist in the beginnings of modern transport. In the first part of the article is represented the notion of unlimited liability and legal regime of contemporary carrier's liability expressed in strict liability. Then is considered legal importance of carrier's fault in fulfilling contract, and especially the influence of degree of fault on (un)limitation of carrier' liability. Finally, author highlights the number of persons who could be identified with carrier and specifically whose intentional and recklessly action would be resulted in unlimited carrier's liability.
PB  - Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd
T2  - Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
T1  - Neograničena odgovornost prevozioca
T1  - Unlimited carrier's liability
EP  - 186
IS  - 2
SP  - 164
VL  - 66
DO  - 10.5937/AlaniPFB1802164J
UR  - conv_458
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2018",
abstract = "Predmet razmatranja predstavlja neograničena odgovornost prevozioca u svim granama saobraćaja, kako u prevozu robe, tako i putnika. Razlog objedinjavajućeg pogleda na neograničenu odgovornost prevozioca sastoji se u istovetnosti uslova za takvu odgovornost. On se sastoji u neopravdano lošem ponašanju prevozioca u ispunjavanju svojih obaveza (namerno i krajnje nepažljivo prouzrokovanje štete). Tek ispunjenjem tog uslova, prevozilac (bilo koje saobraćajne grane) gubi pravo da ograniči svoju odgovornost. Ograničena odgovornost prevozioca se pretpostavlja i najčešće je u svom iznosu prilično ispod vrednosti predmeta prevoza. U počecima savremenog saobraćaja (20. vek), takva odgovornost je pravdana ekonomskom slabošću prevozilaca i tehničkom nerazvijenošću, ali je vremenom takvo stanje potpuno promenjeno, imajući u vidu da su prevozničke kompanije među najimućnijim, a i da je tehnika neslućeno napredovala. Zbog toga se zaključuje da bi bilo pravedno da prevozioci pretpostavljeno odgovaraju do vrednosti predmeta prevoza, a da se za štetu preko tog iznosa dokazuje prevoziočeva namera ili krajnja nepažnja u ispunjavanju obaveza. Prvi deo rada je posvećen objašnjenju pojma neograničene odgovornosti i objektivizaciji prevoziočeve odgovornosti kao pravilnosti u saobraćajnom pravu. Zatim se razmatra pravna važnost krivice prevozioca, posebno u pogledu njegove neograničene odgovornosti i, uopšte, kao mere njegove odgovornosti. Drugi deo rada je posvećen određivanju kruga lica čije se ponašanje poistovećuje sa prevoziočevim, odnosno koja mogu svojim namernim ili krajnje nepažljivim štetnim radnjama da dovedu prevozioca u položaj da neograničeno odgovara., The author in this article analyses unlimited carrier's liability regarding not only to malicious behaviour of carrier in fulfilling obligations from contract of carriage (e.g. causing damage with intent, willful misconduct or recklessly), but also ordinary situation where, despite of non-fulfillment of contract, carrier's liability is limited. The core of this article is concentrated on the explanation of the link between strict carrier's liability and legal importance of degree of carrier's fault in non-fulfillment of contract. The author is on the standpoint that carrier should be liable limited, but not in amount below the value of goods, but in the amount equal to its market value. This liability regime is justified with the fact of high economic power of transport companies and developed technic in traffic and vehicles, which did not exist in the beginnings of modern transport. In the first part of the article is represented the notion of unlimited liability and legal regime of contemporary carrier's liability expressed in strict liability. Then is considered legal importance of carrier's fault in fulfilling contract, and especially the influence of degree of fault on (un)limitation of carrier' liability. Finally, author highlights the number of persons who could be identified with carrier and specifically whose intentional and recklessly action would be resulted in unlimited carrier's liability.",
publisher = "Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd",
journal = "Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu",
title = "Neograničena odgovornost prevozioca, Unlimited carrier's liability",
pages = "186-164",
number = "2",
volume = "66",
doi = "10.5937/AlaniPFB1802164J",
url = "conv_458"
}
Janković, S.. (2018). Neograničena odgovornost prevozioca. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd., 66(2), 164-186.
https://doi.org/10.5937/AlaniPFB1802164J
conv_458
Janković S. Neograničena odgovornost prevozioca. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu. 2018;66(2):164-186.
doi:10.5937/AlaniPFB1802164J
conv_458 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Neograničena odgovornost prevozioca" in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, 66, no. 2 (2018):164-186,
https://doi.org/10.5937/AlaniPFB1802164J .,
conv_458 .

Punovažnost arbitražnog sporazuma u teretnici

Janković, Svetislav

(Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd, 2018)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2018
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1045
AB  - U radu se razmatra punovažnost arbitražnoe sporazuma zaključenog u okviru ugovora o prevozu, a za koji se smatra da čini jedinstvo sa teretnicom. S obzirom da ugovor o prevozu i teretnica čine jednistvo preko pozivajuće norme u teretnici, postavlja se pitanje da li je arbitražni sporazum obavezujući i za docnijeg zakonitog sticaoca teretnice (koji nije izvorni zaključilac ugovora o prevozu, gde se arbitražna klauzula i nalazi). Dolazi se do zaključka da arbitražni sporazum iz ugovora o prevozu može da bude obavezujući za docnijeg sticaoca teretnice samo ako je, kao takav, unesen u teretnicu, tj. ako ga ona, u barem osnovnim elementima, sadrži. U suprotnom, može se osporiti njegova punovažnost kako sa stanovišta načina zaključenja ugovora (tj. da potonji imalac teretnice uopšte nije bio prisutan priliko zaključenja, pa shodno tome ni ne zna njegovu sadržinu), tako i sa stanovišta forme, jer je nedostaje pismeni ugovor, nego postoji samo teretnica koja se poziva na ugovor (a čiju sadržinu docniji sticalac teretnice ne poznaje do kraja). U prvom delu rada, autor pojmovno određuje teretnicu, te njen odnos sa ugovorom o prevozu povodom koga je izdata, smatrajući važnim da se ustanovi u kojoj meri je teretnica podudarna sa ugovorom. Nakon toga, u drugom delu rada, pojmovno se određuje arbitražni sporazum, te uslovi za njegovu punovažnost, posebno, u pogledu forme. Analizira se zadovoljenost njegove forme u teretnici, a naročiti osvrt se pravi u odnosu na imaoca teretnice koji nije i zaključilac ugovora o prevozu. Na kraju, u zaključku se predlaže de lege ferenda rešenje o sadržinskom prisustvu arbitražne klauzule u teretnici, nasuprot trenutnom upućivanju na ugovor o prevozu u okviru koga se nalazi.
AB  - In this article, the author considers validity of arbitration agreement in bill of lading, taking into account that arbitral clause is, actually, contained in contract of carriage. It is assumed that contract of carriage has become integral part of bill of lading, by only printing standard terms and conditions of it on the reverse of bill of lading. That is so regarding the relation between carrier and consignor (shipper, or even consignee), but in the occasion when bill of lading is transferred to the third person who was not initially in contract of carriage, the problems may occur. Indorsee of a bill of lading (as a holder in due course) has not derived his rights from contract of carriage, neither from legal position of its indorser (predecessor) or consignor, but only from bill of lading as documented obligation of carrier. Because of that it's questionable does arbitral clause from contract of carriage may have obligatory effect to indorsee of bill of lading. It is concluded it is possible only when arbitral clause is expressly contained in bill of lading with regard to contract of carriage. To be obligatory for indorsee, it is necessary that arbitral clause would be completely (its content) printed in bill of lading or at least type and place of arbitration. In the first part of article, author analyzes the legal notion and function of bill of lading and its relation to contract of carriage. Afterwards, it is considered arbitration agreement and conditions for its validity, generally and in relationship with contract of carriage and bill of lading. In that part, author tries to highlight problem of legal position of indorsee who is not initially contractor and accordingly has not accepted the arbitral clause. Finally, in the concluding remarks author proposes legally certain solution which consist in request that arbitral clause would be completely contained in bill of lading.
PB  - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
T2  - Pravo i privreda
T1  - Punovažnost arbitražnog sporazuma u teretnici
T1  - Validity of the arbitration agreement in bill of lading
EP  - 381
IS  - 4-6
SP  - 365
VL  - 56
UR  - conv_2242
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2018",
abstract = "U radu se razmatra punovažnost arbitražnoe sporazuma zaključenog u okviru ugovora o prevozu, a za koji se smatra da čini jedinstvo sa teretnicom. S obzirom da ugovor o prevozu i teretnica čine jednistvo preko pozivajuće norme u teretnici, postavlja se pitanje da li je arbitražni sporazum obavezujući i za docnijeg zakonitog sticaoca teretnice (koji nije izvorni zaključilac ugovora o prevozu, gde se arbitražna klauzula i nalazi). Dolazi se do zaključka da arbitražni sporazum iz ugovora o prevozu može da bude obavezujući za docnijeg sticaoca teretnice samo ako je, kao takav, unesen u teretnicu, tj. ako ga ona, u barem osnovnim elementima, sadrži. U suprotnom, može se osporiti njegova punovažnost kako sa stanovišta načina zaključenja ugovora (tj. da potonji imalac teretnice uopšte nije bio prisutan priliko zaključenja, pa shodno tome ni ne zna njegovu sadržinu), tako i sa stanovišta forme, jer je nedostaje pismeni ugovor, nego postoji samo teretnica koja se poziva na ugovor (a čiju sadržinu docniji sticalac teretnice ne poznaje do kraja). U prvom delu rada, autor pojmovno određuje teretnicu, te njen odnos sa ugovorom o prevozu povodom koga je izdata, smatrajući važnim da se ustanovi u kojoj meri je teretnica podudarna sa ugovorom. Nakon toga, u drugom delu rada, pojmovno se određuje arbitražni sporazum, te uslovi za njegovu punovažnost, posebno, u pogledu forme. Analizira se zadovoljenost njegove forme u teretnici, a naročiti osvrt se pravi u odnosu na imaoca teretnice koji nije i zaključilac ugovora o prevozu. Na kraju, u zaključku se predlaže de lege ferenda rešenje o sadržinskom prisustvu arbitražne klauzule u teretnici, nasuprot trenutnom upućivanju na ugovor o prevozu u okviru koga se nalazi., In this article, the author considers validity of arbitration agreement in bill of lading, taking into account that arbitral clause is, actually, contained in contract of carriage. It is assumed that contract of carriage has become integral part of bill of lading, by only printing standard terms and conditions of it on the reverse of bill of lading. That is so regarding the relation between carrier and consignor (shipper, or even consignee), but in the occasion when bill of lading is transferred to the third person who was not initially in contract of carriage, the problems may occur. Indorsee of a bill of lading (as a holder in due course) has not derived his rights from contract of carriage, neither from legal position of its indorser (predecessor) or consignor, but only from bill of lading as documented obligation of carrier. Because of that it's questionable does arbitral clause from contract of carriage may have obligatory effect to indorsee of bill of lading. It is concluded it is possible only when arbitral clause is expressly contained in bill of lading with regard to contract of carriage. To be obligatory for indorsee, it is necessary that arbitral clause would be completely (its content) printed in bill of lading or at least type and place of arbitration. In the first part of article, author analyzes the legal notion and function of bill of lading and its relation to contract of carriage. Afterwards, it is considered arbitration agreement and conditions for its validity, generally and in relationship with contract of carriage and bill of lading. In that part, author tries to highlight problem of legal position of indorsee who is not initially contractor and accordingly has not accepted the arbitral clause. Finally, in the concluding remarks author proposes legally certain solution which consist in request that arbitral clause would be completely contained in bill of lading.",
publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Pravo i privreda",
title = "Punovažnost arbitražnog sporazuma u teretnici, Validity of the arbitration agreement in bill of lading",
pages = "381-365",
number = "4-6",
volume = "56",
url = "conv_2242"
}
Janković, S.. (2018). Punovažnost arbitražnog sporazuma u teretnici. in Pravo i privreda
Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 56(4-6), 365-381.
conv_2242
Janković S. Punovažnost arbitražnog sporazuma u teretnici. in Pravo i privreda. 2018;56(4-6):365-381.
conv_2242 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Punovažnost arbitražnog sporazuma u teretnici" in Pravo i privreda, 56, no. 4-6 (2018):365-381,
conv_2242 .

Odgovornost za izbor u ugovorima u privredi - poseban osvrt na ugovor o organizovanju putovanja i špediciji

Janković, Svetislav

(Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd, 2017)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2017
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/976
AB  - U radu se razmatra pojava i značaj odgovornosti za izbor u privrednom pravu, a posebno u pogledu špedicije i organizovanja putovanja. Uočava se da paralelno sa odgovornošću za izbor drugoga, postoji i odgovornost za rad drugoga, koja se, kao strožija, primenjuje samo kada je izričito ugovorena ili kao sankcija za zlonamerno ponašanje ugovornog pružaoca usluge. Upoređujući špediciju i organizovanje putovanja u ovom smislu, čini se da špediter treba i dalje da odgovara samo za izbor prevozioca, dok organizator treba da odgovara i za rad neposrednih pružalaca turističkih usluga. Razlog ovome leži u činjenici da špediter pretežno obavlja svoju delatnost sa privrednim subjektima, dok je organizator putovanja ograničeniji na putnike kao fizička lica. Zbog zaštite putnika kao potrošača, ali i zbog toga što prima jedinstvenu, ukupnu, naknadu za svoju uslugu, čini se opravdanim da organizator putovanja odgovara ne samo za izbor, nego i za rad lica koja je angažovao prilikom ispunjenja svoje obaveze. Prvo poglavlje je posvećeno nastanku pravnog režima odgovornosti za izbor u ugovorima u privredi, a posebno imajući u vidu sve veću specijalizaciju privrednika u njihovim delatnostima, odnosno odsustvo samostalnosti, autohtonosti, u njihovom obavljanju. U drugom poglavlju se razmatra odgovornost za drugoga, te apsolutni i relativni vid te odgovornosti zavisno od toga da li njen osnov leži u krivici (subjektivna odgovornost) ili ne (objektivna odgovornosti). Treće poglavlje je posvećeno špediciji, a posebno određivanju sadržine standarda savestan i stručan izbor trećeg lica, koja ni u propisima, a ni u sudskoj praksi ne postoji, nego se uzima kao takva u svom blanketnom obliku. U četvrtom poglavlju se razmatra pravni režim odgovornosti organizatora putovanja, kao i pojedini slučajevi iz sudske prakse u ovoj oblasti, dok je peto, poslednje, poglavlje posvećeno zaključnim razmatranjima.
AB  - In this article, the author analyzes phenomenon and significance of liability for wrongful selection of agent in Commercial Law, especially in freight forwarding contract and in some of travel agent contracts, namely package tour. It is evident that across legal systems in Europe exist two legal regime of liability of aforementioned persons. First, strict liability, which is especially represented in France, and second, liability for wrongful selection of agents - assistants in concrete contract, which is based on guilt. The second is predominant in Europe and as such is widespread accepted in Serbian legal system. Comparing freight forwarding and package tour contracts, it seems that freight forwarder should continue be responsible only for his own mistake in selecting sub-agents (so, not for their actions). On the other hand, package tour operator should be responsible not only for wrongfully selection, but primarily for actions of his sub-agents. The reason for this lays in fact that tour operator receive overall, total, price for his service which he can spend on sub-agents irrespectively quality of their service, motivated in their choice by moral hazard. Also, reason for this solution can be find in fact that other party in package tour contract predominantly is natural person as a consumer, passenger who is weakly protected contractor. First part of the article is dedicated to genesis of liability for wrongful selection in Commercial Law, peculiarly having regard to specialization of working process in economy. In the second part, author considers relatively and absolutely aspect of liability for other person, depending on whether guilt is necessary condition for liability. In third and forth part, author considers legal regime of freight forwarding and package tour contract in detail and pays special attention to true content of legal standard of prudent and in a good faith selection of third person as a sub-agent. Author proposes solution in cumulative application of two standards: first, good faith and prudence of ordinary intermediary and second, selecting the carrier or other sub-agent from the list which is approved from the state authority.
PB  - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
T2  - Pravo i privreda
T1  - Odgovornost za izbor u ugovorima u privredi - poseban osvrt na ugovor o organizovanju putovanja i špediciji
T1  - Liability for wrongful selection in commercial law with special regard to the freight forwarder and package tour operator
EP  - 157
IS  - 7-9
SP  - 138
VL  - 55
UR  - conv_2217
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2017",
abstract = "U radu se razmatra pojava i značaj odgovornosti za izbor u privrednom pravu, a posebno u pogledu špedicije i organizovanja putovanja. Uočava se da paralelno sa odgovornošću za izbor drugoga, postoji i odgovornost za rad drugoga, koja se, kao strožija, primenjuje samo kada je izričito ugovorena ili kao sankcija za zlonamerno ponašanje ugovornog pružaoca usluge. Upoređujući špediciju i organizovanje putovanja u ovom smislu, čini se da špediter treba i dalje da odgovara samo za izbor prevozioca, dok organizator treba da odgovara i za rad neposrednih pružalaca turističkih usluga. Razlog ovome leži u činjenici da špediter pretežno obavlja svoju delatnost sa privrednim subjektima, dok je organizator putovanja ograničeniji na putnike kao fizička lica. Zbog zaštite putnika kao potrošača, ali i zbog toga što prima jedinstvenu, ukupnu, naknadu za svoju uslugu, čini se opravdanim da organizator putovanja odgovara ne samo za izbor, nego i za rad lica koja je angažovao prilikom ispunjenja svoje obaveze. Prvo poglavlje je posvećeno nastanku pravnog režima odgovornosti za izbor u ugovorima u privredi, a posebno imajući u vidu sve veću specijalizaciju privrednika u njihovim delatnostima, odnosno odsustvo samostalnosti, autohtonosti, u njihovom obavljanju. U drugom poglavlju se razmatra odgovornost za drugoga, te apsolutni i relativni vid te odgovornosti zavisno od toga da li njen osnov leži u krivici (subjektivna odgovornost) ili ne (objektivna odgovornosti). Treće poglavlje je posvećeno špediciji, a posebno određivanju sadržine standarda savestan i stručan izbor trećeg lica, koja ni u propisima, a ni u sudskoj praksi ne postoji, nego se uzima kao takva u svom blanketnom obliku. U četvrtom poglavlju se razmatra pravni režim odgovornosti organizatora putovanja, kao i pojedini slučajevi iz sudske prakse u ovoj oblasti, dok je peto, poslednje, poglavlje posvećeno zaključnim razmatranjima., In this article, the author analyzes phenomenon and significance of liability for wrongful selection of agent in Commercial Law, especially in freight forwarding contract and in some of travel agent contracts, namely package tour. It is evident that across legal systems in Europe exist two legal regime of liability of aforementioned persons. First, strict liability, which is especially represented in France, and second, liability for wrongful selection of agents - assistants in concrete contract, which is based on guilt. The second is predominant in Europe and as such is widespread accepted in Serbian legal system. Comparing freight forwarding and package tour contracts, it seems that freight forwarder should continue be responsible only for his own mistake in selecting sub-agents (so, not for their actions). On the other hand, package tour operator should be responsible not only for wrongfully selection, but primarily for actions of his sub-agents. The reason for this lays in fact that tour operator receive overall, total, price for his service which he can spend on sub-agents irrespectively quality of their service, motivated in their choice by moral hazard. Also, reason for this solution can be find in fact that other party in package tour contract predominantly is natural person as a consumer, passenger who is weakly protected contractor. First part of the article is dedicated to genesis of liability for wrongful selection in Commercial Law, peculiarly having regard to specialization of working process in economy. In the second part, author considers relatively and absolutely aspect of liability for other person, depending on whether guilt is necessary condition for liability. In third and forth part, author considers legal regime of freight forwarding and package tour contract in detail and pays special attention to true content of legal standard of prudent and in a good faith selection of third person as a sub-agent. Author proposes solution in cumulative application of two standards: first, good faith and prudence of ordinary intermediary and second, selecting the carrier or other sub-agent from the list which is approved from the state authority.",
publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Pravo i privreda",
title = "Odgovornost za izbor u ugovorima u privredi - poseban osvrt na ugovor o organizovanju putovanja i špediciji, Liability for wrongful selection in commercial law with special regard to the freight forwarder and package tour operator",
pages = "157-138",
number = "7-9",
volume = "55",
url = "conv_2217"
}
Janković, S.. (2017). Odgovornost za izbor u ugovorima u privredi - poseban osvrt na ugovor o organizovanju putovanja i špediciji. in Pravo i privreda
Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 55(7-9), 138-157.
conv_2217
Janković S. Odgovornost za izbor u ugovorima u privredi - poseban osvrt na ugovor o organizovanju putovanja i špediciji. in Pravo i privreda. 2017;55(7-9):138-157.
conv_2217 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Odgovornost za izbor u ugovorima u privredi - poseban osvrt na ugovor o organizovanju putovanja i špediciji" in Pravo i privreda, 55, no. 7-9 (2017):138-157,
conv_2217 .

Privilegije na brodu u situaciji stečaja brodovlasnika

Janković, Svetislav

(Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd, 2016)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2016
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/910
AB  - U članku se uočava nedostatak pravne uređenosti veze stečajnog i plovidbenog prava koja se naročito ispoljava u slučaju stečaja brodovlasnika čiji brod je opterećen privilegijama. U toj situaciji javlja se problem kom pravu dati prednost u primeni - stečajnom ili plovidbenom, s obzirom na to da i jedno i drugo sadrže različita pravila namirenja iz prodajne vrednosti dužnikove imovine. Jednovremena primena ovih pravila je nemoguća, pa je neophodno utvrditi redosled namirenja stečajnih i plovidbenih poverilaca kada je predmet namirenja (brod) nedovoljan za potpuno namirenje svih poverilaca. U tom slučaju, autor se zalaže za primenu plovidbenog prava. Razlog davanja prednosti ovoj grani prava objašnjava se činjenicom da sticalac privilegije na brodu, najčešće, ne može da zna da je nad vlasnikom konkretnog broda otvoren postupak stečaja, a još manje da se nalazi u predstečajnom stanju, pa bi, shodno tome, trebalo da se namiruje mimo stečajnog postupka i njegovih pravila.
AB  - In this article author compares two separated branches of law (Admiralty and Bankruptcy) which are connected in case when maritime lien applies on ship whose owner is in bankruptcy. The problem which arises here is to which of two aforementioned branches of law should be given the preference in the application, because these two can't be applied simultaneously. This is because of shortage in value of ship in question which is not enough to settle both admiralty and bankruptcy creditors. Therefore, it is necessary to make the order of priority in which different types of creditors settle their (un)secured claims. Particular problem arises for the claims which are created some short time before and after commencement of the bankruptcy proceedings due to Bankruptcy Law deprives these creditors of secured status. From these reasons, author proposes resolution in preference of Admiralty Law in competition with Bankruptcy Law. The main argument for this reasoning is contained in the fact that maritime lienor doesn't know nor can know that shipowner gets into bankruptcy (or already is in bankruptcy). This conclusion is sup- ported by the fact that maritime lienor usually acquires maritime lien on the ship which is distanced from the owner for miles.
PB  - Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd
T2  - Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
T1  - Privilegije na brodu u situaciji stečaja brodovlasnika
T1  - Maritime liens in case of shipowner's bancruptcy
EP  - 213
IS  - 1
SP  - 196
VL  - 64
DO  - 10.5937/AnaliPFB1601196J
UR  - conv_396
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2016",
abstract = "U članku se uočava nedostatak pravne uređenosti veze stečajnog i plovidbenog prava koja se naročito ispoljava u slučaju stečaja brodovlasnika čiji brod je opterećen privilegijama. U toj situaciji javlja se problem kom pravu dati prednost u primeni - stečajnom ili plovidbenom, s obzirom na to da i jedno i drugo sadrže različita pravila namirenja iz prodajne vrednosti dužnikove imovine. Jednovremena primena ovih pravila je nemoguća, pa je neophodno utvrditi redosled namirenja stečajnih i plovidbenih poverilaca kada je predmet namirenja (brod) nedovoljan za potpuno namirenje svih poverilaca. U tom slučaju, autor se zalaže za primenu plovidbenog prava. Razlog davanja prednosti ovoj grani prava objašnjava se činjenicom da sticalac privilegije na brodu, najčešće, ne može da zna da je nad vlasnikom konkretnog broda otvoren postupak stečaja, a još manje da se nalazi u predstečajnom stanju, pa bi, shodno tome, trebalo da se namiruje mimo stečajnog postupka i njegovih pravila., In this article author compares two separated branches of law (Admiralty and Bankruptcy) which are connected in case when maritime lien applies on ship whose owner is in bankruptcy. The problem which arises here is to which of two aforementioned branches of law should be given the preference in the application, because these two can't be applied simultaneously. This is because of shortage in value of ship in question which is not enough to settle both admiralty and bankruptcy creditors. Therefore, it is necessary to make the order of priority in which different types of creditors settle their (un)secured claims. Particular problem arises for the claims which are created some short time before and after commencement of the bankruptcy proceedings due to Bankruptcy Law deprives these creditors of secured status. From these reasons, author proposes resolution in preference of Admiralty Law in competition with Bankruptcy Law. The main argument for this reasoning is contained in the fact that maritime lienor doesn't know nor can know that shipowner gets into bankruptcy (or already is in bankruptcy). This conclusion is sup- ported by the fact that maritime lienor usually acquires maritime lien on the ship which is distanced from the owner for miles.",
publisher = "Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd",
journal = "Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu",
title = "Privilegije na brodu u situaciji stečaja brodovlasnika, Maritime liens in case of shipowner's bancruptcy",
pages = "213-196",
number = "1",
volume = "64",
doi = "10.5937/AnaliPFB1601196J",
url = "conv_396"
}
Janković, S.. (2016). Privilegije na brodu u situaciji stečaja brodovlasnika. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd., 64(1), 196-213.
https://doi.org/10.5937/AnaliPFB1601196J
conv_396
Janković S. Privilegije na brodu u situaciji stečaja brodovlasnika. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu. 2016;64(1):196-213.
doi:10.5937/AnaliPFB1601196J
conv_396 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Privilegije na brodu u situaciji stečaja brodovlasnika" in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, 64, no. 1 (2016):196-213,
https://doi.org/10.5937/AnaliPFB1601196J .,
conv_396 .

Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe

Janković, Svetislav

(Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd, 2016)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2016
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/937
AB  - U članku se razmatra odgovornost železničkog prevozioca za zakašnjenje u isporuci robe. Ova odgovornost postaje naročito aktuelna imajući u vidu novi pravni okvir železničkog prava koji nastaje promenom sistemskih zakona u ovoj oblasti. Iako na prvi pogled odgovornost prevozioca za zakašnjenje ostaje istovetna onoj koja je postojala po prethodnom istovrsnom zakonu (iz 1995. godine), ona se unekoliko menja činjenicom razdvajanja upravljačke od prevozničke funkcije u Železnicama Srbije. Naime, upravo je jedan od razloga usvajanja novog pravnog okvira u ovoj oblasti bilo usklađivanje sa međunarodnim tendencijama otvaranja železničkog prevoza tržištu, tj. omogućavanjem postojanja više različitih prevozilaca u jednoj zemlji. Uskladivši se sa Viljnuskim protokolom iz 1999. godine, srpsko železničko pravo se suočava sa novim problemom kod odgovornosti za zakašnjenje, u okviru koje prevozilac odgovara i ako je do prekoračenja roka isporuke došlo usled radnji/propusta upravljača železničke infrastrukture. U radu se iznose zaključci koji ovakav pravni režim čine neosnovanim i nedopustivim, a posebno imajući u vidu da upravljač infrastrukture ne može da bude lice kojim se prevozilac prilikom obavljanja svoje delatnosti služi, s obzirom da ga ne može birati, niti davati uputstva i kontrolisati. Zbog toga, predlaže se svojevrsni sistem 'mreže' u okviru koga će svaki subjekt odgovarati za propuste u delu svoje nadležnosti, što bi kao posledici vodilo tome da železnički prevozilac ne može da odgovara za propuste koje je učinio upravljač infrastrukture. U prvom delu rada, autor razmatra novi pravni okvir u oblasti železničkog saobraćaja, osvrćući se na statusnu promenu koju je izvršila Železnica Srbije usklađujući se sa novim propisima. U drugom, centralnom, delu rada određuje se pojam zakašnjenja, različite vrste rokova koje čine jedinstveni rok isporuke, kao i vrste šteta koje mogu da nastanu usled zkašnjenja. Na kraju, u trećem delu, autor iznosi zaključak zalažući se za ideju neodgovornosti prevozioca za zakašnjenje koje nastaje isključivo zbog grešaka upravljača infrastrukture.
AB  - In this article, the author initially, in introductory note, explains a new legal regime in Serbian railway law. It is consisted of three new laws which brought about division of Serbian railway, as one unit, one company, into four separated companies, from which is especially important separation of infrastructure management function from function of carriage. In combination with new Serbian railway legal regime it causes the biggest problem in liability of carrier for delay, because it makes responsible carrier for fault and mistakes of manager of railway's infrastructure, despite of impossibility of carrier to control or make directive to manager of infrastructure. Actually, on this way, the carrier is imposed with a duty of manager of infrastructure to perform timetable and other organizational function in railway network. This legal solution seems unfairly due to carrier neither can choose nor control manager of infrastructure in its operation and from that reason the author proposes new solution which would lead to separation of liability of involved legal persons in railway traffic according to network principle. Network principle, by the way, makes responsible only those in whose part of route (time, way) damage occurred. Consequently, this would make railway carrier responsible only for operation of carriage, but not for above mentioned function of making schedule which is dominantly function of manager of railway infrastructure. In the second and central part of the article, the author explains and specifies what is actually meant by the term of delay, what types of exceeding the referent time exist and, finally, what sort of damages could arise from exceeding the delivery time (especially regarding to commercial and real damage on goods). It is concluded that carrier, in case of delay, should be compensated only with commercial but not real damages on goods, because of existence of different criteria of limiting these damages.
PB  - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
T2  - Pravo i privreda
T1  - Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe
T1  - Liability of railway carrier for delay in delivery of goods
EP  - 128
IS  - 7-9
SP  - 112
VL  - 54
UR  - conv_2183
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2016",
abstract = "U članku se razmatra odgovornost železničkog prevozioca za zakašnjenje u isporuci robe. Ova odgovornost postaje naročito aktuelna imajući u vidu novi pravni okvir železničkog prava koji nastaje promenom sistemskih zakona u ovoj oblasti. Iako na prvi pogled odgovornost prevozioca za zakašnjenje ostaje istovetna onoj koja je postojala po prethodnom istovrsnom zakonu (iz 1995. godine), ona se unekoliko menja činjenicom razdvajanja upravljačke od prevozničke funkcije u Železnicama Srbije. Naime, upravo je jedan od razloga usvajanja novog pravnog okvira u ovoj oblasti bilo usklađivanje sa međunarodnim tendencijama otvaranja železničkog prevoza tržištu, tj. omogućavanjem postojanja više različitih prevozilaca u jednoj zemlji. Uskladivši se sa Viljnuskim protokolom iz 1999. godine, srpsko železničko pravo se suočava sa novim problemom kod odgovornosti za zakašnjenje, u okviru koje prevozilac odgovara i ako je do prekoračenja roka isporuke došlo usled radnji/propusta upravljača železničke infrastrukture. U radu se iznose zaključci koji ovakav pravni režim čine neosnovanim i nedopustivim, a posebno imajući u vidu da upravljač infrastrukture ne može da bude lice kojim se prevozilac prilikom obavljanja svoje delatnosti služi, s obzirom da ga ne može birati, niti davati uputstva i kontrolisati. Zbog toga, predlaže se svojevrsni sistem 'mreže' u okviru koga će svaki subjekt odgovarati za propuste u delu svoje nadležnosti, što bi kao posledici vodilo tome da železnički prevozilac ne može da odgovara za propuste koje je učinio upravljač infrastrukture. U prvom delu rada, autor razmatra novi pravni okvir u oblasti železničkog saobraćaja, osvrćući se na statusnu promenu koju je izvršila Železnica Srbije usklađujući se sa novim propisima. U drugom, centralnom, delu rada određuje se pojam zakašnjenja, različite vrste rokova koje čine jedinstveni rok isporuke, kao i vrste šteta koje mogu da nastanu usled zkašnjenja. Na kraju, u trećem delu, autor iznosi zaključak zalažući se za ideju neodgovornosti prevozioca za zakašnjenje koje nastaje isključivo zbog grešaka upravljača infrastrukture., In this article, the author initially, in introductory note, explains a new legal regime in Serbian railway law. It is consisted of three new laws which brought about division of Serbian railway, as one unit, one company, into four separated companies, from which is especially important separation of infrastructure management function from function of carriage. In combination with new Serbian railway legal regime it causes the biggest problem in liability of carrier for delay, because it makes responsible carrier for fault and mistakes of manager of railway's infrastructure, despite of impossibility of carrier to control or make directive to manager of infrastructure. Actually, on this way, the carrier is imposed with a duty of manager of infrastructure to perform timetable and other organizational function in railway network. This legal solution seems unfairly due to carrier neither can choose nor control manager of infrastructure in its operation and from that reason the author proposes new solution which would lead to separation of liability of involved legal persons in railway traffic according to network principle. Network principle, by the way, makes responsible only those in whose part of route (time, way) damage occurred. Consequently, this would make railway carrier responsible only for operation of carriage, but not for above mentioned function of making schedule which is dominantly function of manager of railway infrastructure. In the second and central part of the article, the author explains and specifies what is actually meant by the term of delay, what types of exceeding the referent time exist and, finally, what sort of damages could arise from exceeding the delivery time (especially regarding to commercial and real damage on goods). It is concluded that carrier, in case of delay, should be compensated only with commercial but not real damages on goods, because of existence of different criteria of limiting these damages.",
publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Pravo i privreda",
title = "Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe, Liability of railway carrier for delay in delivery of goods",
pages = "128-112",
number = "7-9",
volume = "54",
url = "conv_2183"
}
Janković, S.. (2016). Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe. in Pravo i privreda
Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 54(7-9), 112-128.
conv_2183
Janković S. Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe. in Pravo i privreda. 2016;54(7-9):112-128.
conv_2183 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Odgovornost železnice za zakašnjenje u predaji robe" in Pravo i privreda, 54, no. 7-9 (2016):112-128,
conv_2183 .

Pravni režim privilegija na brodu

Janković, Svetislav Đ

(Univerzitet u Beogradu, Pravni fakultet, 2015)

TY  - THES
AU  - Janković, Svetislav Đ
PY  - 2015
UR  - http://eteze.bg.ac.rs/application/showtheses?thesesId=2546
UR  - https://nardus.mpn.gov.rs/handle/123456789/4896
UR  - https://fedorabg.bg.ac.rs/fedora/get/o:10603/bdef:Content/download
UR  - http://vbs.rs/scripts/cobiss?command=DISPLAY&base=70036&RID=514057137
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/21
AB  - U doktorskoj disertaciji autor obrađuje pravni režim privilegija na brodu kako spram važećih nacionalnih i međunarodnih pravila, tako i spram onih koja su im prethodila. U obzir su, takođe, uzete preovlađujuće teorijske misli, a sve u cilju kako bi se otkrio pravi smisao i značaj instituta privilegija na brodu. Sadržina doktorske disertacije je podeljena u devet logičnih celina pod naslovom glava, pri čemu je njihov redosled raspoređen tako što su u početnim delovima disertacije obrađivane donekle opštije i nespornije teme vezane za ovaj institut, da bi u daljem toku rada težište bilo na temama od, pre svega, praktičnog značaja, te otkrivanju veza sa drugim pravnim institutima. Naročiti značaj je posvećen pravnoj prirodi privilegija na brodu, kojoj se pažnja poklanja u svim glavama disertacije, a posebno u glavi šestoj koja je posvećena isključivo njoj. Upravo kroz pravnu prirodu, odnosnu teoriju subjektivizacije broda, želi se dati doprinos teoriji plovidbenog prava u pogledu uticaja plovidbe broda na njegov status. Naime, privilegije na brodu, kao obezbeđujuća prava koja nastaju isključivo u plovidbi (kretanju) broda, svojim nastankom utiču na drugačije poimanje statusa broda. Zaključuje se da one imaju uticaj da brod od objekta prava postane subjekt. Opravdanost ovakvom zaključku autor nalazi u činjenici da se privilegije na brodu vezuju isključivo za brod, a ne za brodara (kao ličnog dužnika) ili brodovlasnika (ako je lice različito od brodara). Pri tom, autor ne zanemaruje činjenicu da se privilegije na brodu vezuju za predmet obezbeđenja kao bilo koje drugo založno (obezbeđujuće) pravo. Međutim, u disertaciji se otkriva dodatno svojstvo privilegija na brodu u odnosu na druga obezbeđujuća prava, a koje se sastoji u tome što ona mogu da nastanu isključivo u plovidbi, povodom tačno određenih potraživanja i da se činom svoga nastanka, vezuju za brod mnogo jačim pravnim vezama, doprinoseći da od početnog objekta prava postane subjekt. U prvoj glavi disertacije, autor prikazuje svojevrstan zaplet pravnih odnosa koji mogu da dovedu do nastanka privilegija na brodu.
AB  - In this doctoral thesis, the author tries to explain the institute of maritime liens from the point of international and national legal sources and also with regard to past and current legal theory concerning this issue. The thesis is divided into nine chapters which are logically linked with the main hypothesis of the whole work. The chapters are ordered from somewhat general and noncontroversial issues to those with more practical significance. The idea is that legal status of ship becomes a legal entity when the maritime lien appears. It is some kind of modified personification theory (broadly accepted in the USA) because author doesn’t assert that a ship is initially legal (juridical) entity or just legal person. Contrary to it, author claims that ship as such is not legal entity, but she becomes to be one, when maritime lien appears (onto her / it). Justification for this assertion, author finds in specific nature of maritime claims whose performance is protected by maritime liens. This specificity is based on relationship between maritime claim and ship or in other words, between the benefits / casualties which stay behind maritime claim and sailing venture of the ship. Just as soon as these benefits / casualties arise, the ship becomes debtor to the persons linked with these claims. In the first chapter, the author presents fictitious case of a maritime venture. Throughout this venture, the ship is a subject of different legal relations, but the most important is that at the same time when these relations occur, the ship becomes a legal subject, legal person and legal entity. Actually, at the first moment ship is the subject which links different persons by its functions, nevertheless it becomes a legal person afterwards just as the persons involved in its previous stage. In the second chapter author presents different legal sources of maritime liens, especially with regard to international conventions related to maritime liens and national regulations. But, even more, it presents the regulations related to arrest of ship which is important, because maritime lien is useless in legal sense without help of institute of arrest of ship.
PB  - Univerzitet u Beogradu, Pravni fakultet
T1  - Pravni režim privilegija na brodu
T1  - Special legal regime of maritime liens
UR  - t-2337
ER  - 
@phdthesis{
author = "Janković, Svetislav Đ",
year = "2015",
abstract = "U doktorskoj disertaciji autor obrađuje pravni režim privilegija na brodu kako spram važećih nacionalnih i međunarodnih pravila, tako i spram onih koja su im prethodila. U obzir su, takođe, uzete preovlađujuće teorijske misli, a sve u cilju kako bi se otkrio pravi smisao i značaj instituta privilegija na brodu. Sadržina doktorske disertacije je podeljena u devet logičnih celina pod naslovom glava, pri čemu je njihov redosled raspoređen tako što su u početnim delovima disertacije obrađivane donekle opštije i nespornije teme vezane za ovaj institut, da bi u daljem toku rada težište bilo na temama od, pre svega, praktičnog značaja, te otkrivanju veza sa drugim pravnim institutima. Naročiti značaj je posvećen pravnoj prirodi privilegija na brodu, kojoj se pažnja poklanja u svim glavama disertacije, a posebno u glavi šestoj koja je posvećena isključivo njoj. Upravo kroz pravnu prirodu, odnosnu teoriju subjektivizacije broda, želi se dati doprinos teoriji plovidbenog prava u pogledu uticaja plovidbe broda na njegov status. Naime, privilegije na brodu, kao obezbeđujuća prava koja nastaju isključivo u plovidbi (kretanju) broda, svojim nastankom utiču na drugačije poimanje statusa broda. Zaključuje se da one imaju uticaj da brod od objekta prava postane subjekt. Opravdanost ovakvom zaključku autor nalazi u činjenici da se privilegije na brodu vezuju isključivo za brod, a ne za brodara (kao ličnog dužnika) ili brodovlasnika (ako je lice različito od brodara). Pri tom, autor ne zanemaruje činjenicu da se privilegije na brodu vezuju za predmet obezbeđenja kao bilo koje drugo založno (obezbeđujuće) pravo. Međutim, u disertaciji se otkriva dodatno svojstvo privilegija na brodu u odnosu na druga obezbeđujuća prava, a koje se sastoji u tome što ona mogu da nastanu isključivo u plovidbi, povodom tačno određenih potraživanja i da se činom svoga nastanka, vezuju za brod mnogo jačim pravnim vezama, doprinoseći da od početnog objekta prava postane subjekt. U prvoj glavi disertacije, autor prikazuje svojevrstan zaplet pravnih odnosa koji mogu da dovedu do nastanka privilegija na brodu., In this doctoral thesis, the author tries to explain the institute of maritime liens from the point of international and national legal sources and also with regard to past and current legal theory concerning this issue. The thesis is divided into nine chapters which are logically linked with the main hypothesis of the whole work. The chapters are ordered from somewhat general and noncontroversial issues to those with more practical significance. The idea is that legal status of ship becomes a legal entity when the maritime lien appears. It is some kind of modified personification theory (broadly accepted in the USA) because author doesn’t assert that a ship is initially legal (juridical) entity or just legal person. Contrary to it, author claims that ship as such is not legal entity, but she becomes to be one, when maritime lien appears (onto her / it). Justification for this assertion, author finds in specific nature of maritime claims whose performance is protected by maritime liens. This specificity is based on relationship between maritime claim and ship or in other words, between the benefits / casualties which stay behind maritime claim and sailing venture of the ship. Just as soon as these benefits / casualties arise, the ship becomes debtor to the persons linked with these claims. In the first chapter, the author presents fictitious case of a maritime venture. Throughout this venture, the ship is a subject of different legal relations, but the most important is that at the same time when these relations occur, the ship becomes a legal subject, legal person and legal entity. Actually, at the first moment ship is the subject which links different persons by its functions, nevertheless it becomes a legal person afterwards just as the persons involved in its previous stage. In the second chapter author presents different legal sources of maritime liens, especially with regard to international conventions related to maritime liens and national regulations. But, even more, it presents the regulations related to arrest of ship which is important, because maritime lien is useless in legal sense without help of institute of arrest of ship.",
publisher = "Univerzitet u Beogradu, Pravni fakultet",
title = "Pravni režim privilegija na brodu, Special legal regime of maritime liens",
url = "t-2337"
}
Janković, S. Đ.. (2015). Pravni režim privilegija na brodu. 
Univerzitet u Beogradu, Pravni fakultet..
t-2337
Janković SĐ. Pravni režim privilegija na brodu. 2015;.
t-2337 .
Janković, Svetislav Đ, "Pravni režim privilegija na brodu" (2015),
t-2337 .

Prevoziočevo zakonsko založno pravo i novi Građanski zakonik Republike Srbije

Janković, Svetislav

(Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd, 2015)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2015
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/873
AB  - Na početku rada, izlažu se pojam i opšti i posebni pravni režim prevoziočevog založnog prava po osnovu neplaćene prevoznine. Nakon toga, razmatra se pravna priroda ovog prava u smislu da li je ono po svojsvtima bliže klasičnom zakonskom založnom pravu ili, pak, pravu zadržavanja. Autor u radu predlaže drugačiji pravni režim prevoziočevog založnog prava u odnosu na postojeći. Naime, predlaže se da u Građanskom zakoniku bude regulisan samo ugovor koji zaključuje privatni, a ne i javni prevozilac. S obzirom da privatni prevozilac nije dužan (poput javnog) da zaključuje ugovor o prevozu sa svakim trećim licem, on je u mogućnosti da proceni solventnost i dobronamernost naručioca prevoza. Suprotno, zbog učestalosti, brzine i načina zaključenja ugovora (po pristupu), to nije u stanju javni prevozilac, pa mu se zbog toga i daje zakonsko založno pravo kako bi ga zaštitilo u slučaju kada mu nije plaćena prevoznina.
AB  - In this article, the author makes difference between common and contract carrier. Common carrier is the subject in law which has obligation to conclude the contract (of carriage) with, practically, everybody, provided that he has material capacity, ability to do carriage in particularly moment of conclusion of contract. Having this difference in mind, the author proposed new legal regime regarding carrier's lien in New Civil Code of Serbia. It is suggested that common carrier has a lien, but contrary to him, that contract carrier shouldn't have. Justification for this proposition is based on (legal) fact that common carrier doesn't have a freedom to choose his (opposite contractor) and because of that, he has to be protected with statutory lien. In the second part of article, the author analyzes the legal nature of carrier's lien. On the one hand, it is the right of retention, but on the other, it is a classical statutory lien. In accord with non-possessory nature of statutory lien, the author concludes that carrier's lien in current Serbian legal regime is, in fact, right of retention, especially because in Serbian legal system this right is supplied with right to sale (reserved thing). The author is of opinion that carrier's statutory lien should (stay) be non possessory, despite of uncertainty which carrier (or other merchant) has statutory lien regarding in particularly thing. This uncertainty would be removed with optional registration at commercial registry.
PB  - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
T2  - Pravo i privreda
T1  - Prevoziočevo zakonsko založno pravo i novi Građanski zakonik Republike Srbije
T1  - Carrier's statutory lien and new Civil Code of the Republic of Serbia
EP  - 518
IS  - 4-6
SP  - 503
VL  - 53
UR  - conv_2153
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2015",
abstract = "Na početku rada, izlažu se pojam i opšti i posebni pravni režim prevoziočevog založnog prava po osnovu neplaćene prevoznine. Nakon toga, razmatra se pravna priroda ovog prava u smislu da li je ono po svojsvtima bliže klasičnom zakonskom založnom pravu ili, pak, pravu zadržavanja. Autor u radu predlaže drugačiji pravni režim prevoziočevog založnog prava u odnosu na postojeći. Naime, predlaže se da u Građanskom zakoniku bude regulisan samo ugovor koji zaključuje privatni, a ne i javni prevozilac. S obzirom da privatni prevozilac nije dužan (poput javnog) da zaključuje ugovor o prevozu sa svakim trećim licem, on je u mogućnosti da proceni solventnost i dobronamernost naručioca prevoza. Suprotno, zbog učestalosti, brzine i načina zaključenja ugovora (po pristupu), to nije u stanju javni prevozilac, pa mu se zbog toga i daje zakonsko založno pravo kako bi ga zaštitilo u slučaju kada mu nije plaćena prevoznina., In this article, the author makes difference between common and contract carrier. Common carrier is the subject in law which has obligation to conclude the contract (of carriage) with, practically, everybody, provided that he has material capacity, ability to do carriage in particularly moment of conclusion of contract. Having this difference in mind, the author proposed new legal regime regarding carrier's lien in New Civil Code of Serbia. It is suggested that common carrier has a lien, but contrary to him, that contract carrier shouldn't have. Justification for this proposition is based on (legal) fact that common carrier doesn't have a freedom to choose his (opposite contractor) and because of that, he has to be protected with statutory lien. In the second part of article, the author analyzes the legal nature of carrier's lien. On the one hand, it is the right of retention, but on the other, it is a classical statutory lien. In accord with non-possessory nature of statutory lien, the author concludes that carrier's lien in current Serbian legal regime is, in fact, right of retention, especially because in Serbian legal system this right is supplied with right to sale (reserved thing). The author is of opinion that carrier's statutory lien should (stay) be non possessory, despite of uncertainty which carrier (or other merchant) has statutory lien regarding in particularly thing. This uncertainty would be removed with optional registration at commercial registry.",
publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Pravo i privreda",
title = "Prevoziočevo zakonsko založno pravo i novi Građanski zakonik Republike Srbije, Carrier's statutory lien and new Civil Code of the Republic of Serbia",
pages = "518-503",
number = "4-6",
volume = "53",
url = "conv_2153"
}
Janković, S.. (2015). Prevoziočevo zakonsko založno pravo i novi Građanski zakonik Republike Srbije. in Pravo i privreda
Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 53(4-6), 503-518.
conv_2153
Janković S. Prevoziočevo zakonsko založno pravo i novi Građanski zakonik Republike Srbije. in Pravo i privreda. 2015;53(4-6):503-518.
conv_2153 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Prevoziočevo zakonsko založno pravo i novi Građanski zakonik Republike Srbije" in Pravo i privreda, 53, no. 4-6 (2015):503-518,
conv_2153 .

Založno pravo na vazduhoplovu s posebnim osvrtom na zakonsko založno pravo

Janković, Svetislav

(Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd, 2014)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2014
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/771
AB  - U članku se razmatraju tri moguće vrste založnog prava na vazduhoplovu. Posebna pažnja se obraća na zakonsko založno pravo i na odnos s ugovornim i sudskim založnim pravom. Zbog specifičnosti vazduhoplova kao (ne)pokretne stvari koja se naročito uočava kod sticanja stvarnih prava, na odgovarajućim mestima u radu vazduhoplov se poredi s brodom kao vrlo srodnom stvarju u ovim pitanjima. Značaj založnih prava na vazduhoplovu dolazi posebno do izražaja donošenjem srpskog Zakona o vazdušnom prevozu 2011. godine i Kejptaunske konvencije 2001. godine. Uočava se međusobna suprotstavljenost interesa imalaca različitih vrsta založnog prava na vazduhoplovu. U tom smislu, autor, analizirajući pravila različitih izvora prava, pokušava da pruži rešenja za skladan poredak namirenja ovih založnih prava na istom vazduhoplovu.
AB  - The paper examines three types of liens on aircraft: mortgage (as contractual lien), statutory and judicial lien on aircraft. Special attention is paid to statutory liens and its relationship with mortgage and judicial lien on same aircraft. The author highlights the problem of priority of different type of secured creditors due to the fact of existing competition between their interests. This problem is especially enlarged because of simultaneously applying three different source of law: Cape Town Convention 2001, Serbian Law of Air Transport 2011 and Geneva Convention on the Recognition of Rights in Aircraft 1948. Conclusion is that the creditor with statutory lien on aircraft has the biggest priority in realization of his right over other creditors and even creditors secured with mortgage and judicial lien which have priority between themselves in comply with principle 'first in time, first in right'. In order to achieve the ideas of this conclusion in practice it is necessary for courts to use teleological interpretation in applying laws. This is especially because of certain inconsistencies between different legal sources in regard of notion, order of priority and effect of different type of liens on aircraft.
PB  - Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd
T2  - Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
T1  - Založno pravo na vazduhoplovu s posebnim osvrtom na zakonsko založno pravo
T1  - Liens on aircraft with special reference on statutory liens
EP  - 196
IS  - 2
SP  - 180
VL  - 62
DO  - 10.5937/AnaliPFB1402180J
UR  - conv_340
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2014",
abstract = "U članku se razmatraju tri moguće vrste založnog prava na vazduhoplovu. Posebna pažnja se obraća na zakonsko založno pravo i na odnos s ugovornim i sudskim založnim pravom. Zbog specifičnosti vazduhoplova kao (ne)pokretne stvari koja se naročito uočava kod sticanja stvarnih prava, na odgovarajućim mestima u radu vazduhoplov se poredi s brodom kao vrlo srodnom stvarju u ovim pitanjima. Značaj založnih prava na vazduhoplovu dolazi posebno do izražaja donošenjem srpskog Zakona o vazdušnom prevozu 2011. godine i Kejptaunske konvencije 2001. godine. Uočava se međusobna suprotstavljenost interesa imalaca različitih vrsta založnog prava na vazduhoplovu. U tom smislu, autor, analizirajući pravila različitih izvora prava, pokušava da pruži rešenja za skladan poredak namirenja ovih založnih prava na istom vazduhoplovu., The paper examines three types of liens on aircraft: mortgage (as contractual lien), statutory and judicial lien on aircraft. Special attention is paid to statutory liens and its relationship with mortgage and judicial lien on same aircraft. The author highlights the problem of priority of different type of secured creditors due to the fact of existing competition between their interests. This problem is especially enlarged because of simultaneously applying three different source of law: Cape Town Convention 2001, Serbian Law of Air Transport 2011 and Geneva Convention on the Recognition of Rights in Aircraft 1948. Conclusion is that the creditor with statutory lien on aircraft has the biggest priority in realization of his right over other creditors and even creditors secured with mortgage and judicial lien which have priority between themselves in comply with principle 'first in time, first in right'. In order to achieve the ideas of this conclusion in practice it is necessary for courts to use teleological interpretation in applying laws. This is especially because of certain inconsistencies between different legal sources in regard of notion, order of priority and effect of different type of liens on aircraft.",
publisher = "Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd",
journal = "Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu",
title = "Založno pravo na vazduhoplovu s posebnim osvrtom na zakonsko založno pravo, Liens on aircraft with special reference on statutory liens",
pages = "196-180",
number = "2",
volume = "62",
doi = "10.5937/AnaliPFB1402180J",
url = "conv_340"
}
Janković, S.. (2014). Založno pravo na vazduhoplovu s posebnim osvrtom na zakonsko založno pravo. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
Univerzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd., 62(2), 180-196.
https://doi.org/10.5937/AnaliPFB1402180J
conv_340
Janković S. Založno pravo na vazduhoplovu s posebnim osvrtom na zakonsko založno pravo. in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu. 2014;62(2):180-196.
doi:10.5937/AnaliPFB1402180J
conv_340 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Založno pravo na vazduhoplovu s posebnim osvrtom na zakonsko založno pravo" in Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, 62, no. 2 (2014):180-196,
https://doi.org/10.5937/AnaliPFB1402180J .,
conv_340 .

Opšte ograničenje odgovornosti u unutrašnjoj plovidbi

Janković, Svetislav

(Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd, 2014)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2014
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/794
AB  - Opšte ograničenje odgovornosti je institut preuzet iz pomorskog prava. Na početku rada se obrađuju opšta pitanja nastanka i opravdanosti ovog instituta. U radu se naročita pažnja posvećuje Strazburškoj konvenciji o ograničenju odgovornosti u unutrašnjoj plovidbi iz 2012. godine, koju je do sada samo Republika Srbija ratifikovala. Autor kritički razmatra institute opšteg ograničenja odgovornosti iz pomenute konvencije, te ih na pogodnim mestima poredi sa srpskim pravom u ovoj oblasti, ističući razlike između pravnih režima. Dolazi se do zaključka da je Republika Srbija učinila važan korak napred ratifikujući ovu konvenciju, posebno imajući u vidu činjenicu nastanka jedinstvenog 'Dunavskog prostora' stvaranjem kanala Dunav-Rajna-Majna (Evropski kanal). Na ovaj način se ispunjavaju pravni i faktički preduslovi za oživljavanje i dalji razvoj rečnog brodarstva u Srbiji.
AB  - Global limitation of liability means possibility for ship-owner and other authorized persons to limit their responsibility upon all types of their creditors (contractual and non-contractual), which actually means possibility to exclude their liability founding the 'fund of limitation' before the court. Global limitation of liability has its origins in old Maritime Law. Although, this legal institute could be viewed as anachronistic and, even, overprotective to ship-owners and other authorized persons, it is very useful tool for contemporary normal performance of commercial trade relating to inland navigation. In this article the author explains the new legal international regime of global limitation of liability in inland navigation, which is introduced by enacting the Strasbourg Convention of Limitation of Liability in Inland Navigation 2012. He makes comparison with currently applicable domestic legal regime in this matter and indicates the differences. The Author concludes that ratification of above-mentioned Convention is a step forward for the Republic of Serbia. With a creation of Rheine-Danube navigation channel condition is also established for better integration of countries which are interconnected with the biggest European rivers. Adopting the Strasbourg Convention 2012 is prerequisite for equal treatment of ship-owners in different countries and, by that way, for encouragement of dealing in inland navigation industry as the most ecological branch of transport. Finally, author indicates the awareness of limit application of global limitation of liability, because this institute is useful only for large damages.
PB  - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
T2  - Pravo i privreda
T1  - Opšte ograničenje odgovornosti u unutrašnjoj plovidbi
T1  - Global limitation of liability in inland navigation
EP  - 374
IS  - 7-9
SP  - 354
VL  - 52
UR  - conv_2133
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2014",
abstract = "Opšte ograničenje odgovornosti je institut preuzet iz pomorskog prava. Na početku rada se obrađuju opšta pitanja nastanka i opravdanosti ovog instituta. U radu se naročita pažnja posvećuje Strazburškoj konvenciji o ograničenju odgovornosti u unutrašnjoj plovidbi iz 2012. godine, koju je do sada samo Republika Srbija ratifikovala. Autor kritički razmatra institute opšteg ograničenja odgovornosti iz pomenute konvencije, te ih na pogodnim mestima poredi sa srpskim pravom u ovoj oblasti, ističući razlike između pravnih režima. Dolazi se do zaključka da je Republika Srbija učinila važan korak napred ratifikujući ovu konvenciju, posebno imajući u vidu činjenicu nastanka jedinstvenog 'Dunavskog prostora' stvaranjem kanala Dunav-Rajna-Majna (Evropski kanal). Na ovaj način se ispunjavaju pravni i faktički preduslovi za oživljavanje i dalji razvoj rečnog brodarstva u Srbiji., Global limitation of liability means possibility for ship-owner and other authorized persons to limit their responsibility upon all types of their creditors (contractual and non-contractual), which actually means possibility to exclude their liability founding the 'fund of limitation' before the court. Global limitation of liability has its origins in old Maritime Law. Although, this legal institute could be viewed as anachronistic and, even, overprotective to ship-owners and other authorized persons, it is very useful tool for contemporary normal performance of commercial trade relating to inland navigation. In this article the author explains the new legal international regime of global limitation of liability in inland navigation, which is introduced by enacting the Strasbourg Convention of Limitation of Liability in Inland Navigation 2012. He makes comparison with currently applicable domestic legal regime in this matter and indicates the differences. The Author concludes that ratification of above-mentioned Convention is a step forward for the Republic of Serbia. With a creation of Rheine-Danube navigation channel condition is also established for better integration of countries which are interconnected with the biggest European rivers. Adopting the Strasbourg Convention 2012 is prerequisite for equal treatment of ship-owners in different countries and, by that way, for encouragement of dealing in inland navigation industry as the most ecological branch of transport. Finally, author indicates the awareness of limit application of global limitation of liability, because this institute is useful only for large damages.",
publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Pravo i privreda",
title = "Opšte ograničenje odgovornosti u unutrašnjoj plovidbi, Global limitation of liability in inland navigation",
pages = "374-354",
number = "7-9",
volume = "52",
url = "conv_2133"
}
Janković, S.. (2014). Opšte ograničenje odgovornosti u unutrašnjoj plovidbi. in Pravo i privreda
Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 52(7-9), 354-374.
conv_2133
Janković S. Opšte ograničenje odgovornosti u unutrašnjoj plovidbi. in Pravo i privreda. 2014;52(7-9):354-374.
conv_2133 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Opšte ograničenje odgovornosti u unutrašnjoj plovidbi" in Pravo i privreda, 52, no. 7-9 (2014):354-374,
conv_2133 .

Odgovornost vazduhoplovnog prevozioca za štete koje putnik pretrpi usled oštećenja zdravlja za vreme prevoza, a koje nije uzrokovano nezgodom na vazduhoplovu

Janković, Svetislav

(Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd, 2013)

TY  - CONF
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2013
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/730
PB  - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
C3  - Pravo i privreda
T1  - Odgovornost vazduhoplovnog prevozioca za štete koje putnik pretrpi usled oštećenja zdravlja za vreme prevoza, a koje nije uzrokovano nezgodom na vazduhoplovu
T1  - Air carrier liability for mental injuries of passengers caused during the transport
EP  - 336
IS  - 7-9
SP  - 321
VL  - 50
UR  - conv_2106
ER  - 
@conference{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2013",
publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Pravo i privreda",
title = "Odgovornost vazduhoplovnog prevozioca za štete koje putnik pretrpi usled oštećenja zdravlja za vreme prevoza, a koje nije uzrokovano nezgodom na vazduhoplovu, Air carrier liability for mental injuries of passengers caused during the transport",
pages = "336-321",
number = "7-9",
volume = "50",
url = "conv_2106"
}
Janković, S.. (2013). Odgovornost vazduhoplovnog prevozioca za štete koje putnik pretrpi usled oštećenja zdravlja za vreme prevoza, a koje nije uzrokovano nezgodom na vazduhoplovu. in Pravo i privreda
Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 50(7-9), 321-336.
conv_2106
Janković S. Odgovornost vazduhoplovnog prevozioca za štete koje putnik pretrpi usled oštećenja zdravlja za vreme prevoza, a koje nije uzrokovano nezgodom na vazduhoplovu. in Pravo i privreda. 2013;50(7-9):321-336.
conv_2106 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Odgovornost vazduhoplovnog prevozioca za štete koje putnik pretrpi usled oštećenja zdravlja za vreme prevoza, a koje nije uzrokovano nezgodom na vazduhoplovu" in Pravo i privreda, 50, no. 7-9 (2013):321-336,
conv_2106 .

Specifičnosti imovinske odgovornosti za štetu od izlivanja/izbacivanja nafte sa broda u vodu

Janković, Svetislav

(Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd, 2012)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janković, Svetislav
PY  - 2012
UR  - https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/661
AB  - Ovaj rad se bavi specifičnostima koje postoje u pravu naknade šteta usled izazivanja naftnih mrlja od 'brodova'u plovidbi uopšte (kako pomorskoj, tako i rečnoj, kanalskoj i jezerskoj). Specifičnosti ove odgovornosti se posmatraju, uglavnom, spram klasične odgovornosti u plovidbenom pravu. Ovde su posebno izdvojene razlike u pogledu osnova odgovornosti, subjekta odgovornosti, instituta obaveznog osiguranja od odgovornosti, kao i samog međunarodnog obeštećujućeg fonda. Cilj rada je da pokaže neke postojeće nelogičnosti u sistemu stvorenom međunarodnim konvencijama i njihovom primenom od strane država. Naročita pažnja je posvećena predlozima za poboljšanje postojećeg sistema i to kako kroz predloge de lege ferenda promene trenutnog pravnog režima, tako i kroz predloge sudskoj i arbitražnoj praksi u smislu kreativnijeg tumačenja pozitivnih pravila.
AB  - This work deals with some specific aspects of civil liability regarding the oil accident caused by discharge and spill of oil by seas and inlands ships. The main idea of the author in this paper is to try to explain and prove the genuine legal nature of (strict) civil liability for the oil accident caused by commercial ships. Although the Convention regime stipulated that only shipowner has had responsibility for oil accident, the author' opinion for this issue is opposite. He has considered that besides shipowner, the liability person should be the operator of the ship. The reason for this viewpoint is found in fact that operator has possession of the ship (and, also of the cargo oil) and therefore he has to bear liability' burden. The author concludes that although the operator is not registered owner of the ship, he has real possibility to manage with ship and to influences to increased and decreased of transport' risks. At the end of the work, it would be explained the role of the International Compensation Fund in the case of oil accident.
PB  - Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd
T2  - Pravo i privreda
T1  - Specifičnosti imovinske odgovornosti za štetu od izlivanja/izbacivanja nafte sa broda u vodu
T1  - Some specific aspects of the civil liability for discharge and spill the oil from the ships
EP  - 71
IS  - 10-12
SP  - 52
VL  - 49
UR  - conv_2082
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Janković, Svetislav",
year = "2012",
abstract = "Ovaj rad se bavi specifičnostima koje postoje u pravu naknade šteta usled izazivanja naftnih mrlja od 'brodova'u plovidbi uopšte (kako pomorskoj, tako i rečnoj, kanalskoj i jezerskoj). Specifičnosti ove odgovornosti se posmatraju, uglavnom, spram klasične odgovornosti u plovidbenom pravu. Ovde su posebno izdvojene razlike u pogledu osnova odgovornosti, subjekta odgovornosti, instituta obaveznog osiguranja od odgovornosti, kao i samog međunarodnog obeštećujućeg fonda. Cilj rada je da pokaže neke postojeće nelogičnosti u sistemu stvorenom međunarodnim konvencijama i njihovom primenom od strane država. Naročita pažnja je posvećena predlozima za poboljšanje postojećeg sistema i to kako kroz predloge de lege ferenda promene trenutnog pravnog režima, tako i kroz predloge sudskoj i arbitražnoj praksi u smislu kreativnijeg tumačenja pozitivnih pravila., This work deals with some specific aspects of civil liability regarding the oil accident caused by discharge and spill of oil by seas and inlands ships. The main idea of the author in this paper is to try to explain and prove the genuine legal nature of (strict) civil liability for the oil accident caused by commercial ships. Although the Convention regime stipulated that only shipowner has had responsibility for oil accident, the author' opinion for this issue is opposite. He has considered that besides shipowner, the liability person should be the operator of the ship. The reason for this viewpoint is found in fact that operator has possession of the ship (and, also of the cargo oil) and therefore he has to bear liability' burden. The author concludes that although the operator is not registered owner of the ship, he has real possibility to manage with ship and to influences to increased and decreased of transport' risks. At the end of the work, it would be explained the role of the International Compensation Fund in the case of oil accident.",
publisher = "Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd",
journal = "Pravo i privreda",
title = "Specifičnosti imovinske odgovornosti za štetu od izlivanja/izbacivanja nafte sa broda u vodu, Some specific aspects of the civil liability for discharge and spill the oil from the ships",
pages = "71-52",
number = "10-12",
volume = "49",
url = "conv_2082"
}
Janković, S.. (2012). Specifičnosti imovinske odgovornosti za štetu od izlivanja/izbacivanja nafte sa broda u vodu. in Pravo i privreda
Udruženje pravnika u privredi Srbije, Beograd., 49(10-12), 52-71.
conv_2082
Janković S. Specifičnosti imovinske odgovornosti za štetu od izlivanja/izbacivanja nafte sa broda u vodu. in Pravo i privreda. 2012;49(10-12):52-71.
conv_2082 .
Janković, Svetislav, "Specifičnosti imovinske odgovornosti za štetu od izlivanja/izbacivanja nafte sa broda u vodu" in Pravo i privreda, 49, no. 10-12 (2012):52-71,
conv_2082 .