@inbook{
author = "Cvetković Đorđević, Valentina",
year = "2015",
abstract = "Institut pravno neosnovanog obogaćenja prvi put je regulisan u švajcarskom
pravu u XIX veku. Njegova svrha predstavlja sprečavanje neosnovanog sticanja
imovinske koristi na tuđ račun. Lice koje je neosnovano ostvarilo imovinsku
korist na tuđ račun dužno je da je preda licu kome ona pripada. Da bi ostvario
restituciju osiromašeni je dužan da dokaže obogaćenje tuženog koje je u korelativnoj
vezi sa osiromašenjem i za koje ne postoji pravni osnov. Zakon o obligacionim
odnosima uređuje institut pravno neosnovanog obogaćenja pod nazivom „Sticanje
bez osnova“ u čl. 210-219. Opšte pravilo o neosnovanom obogaćenju (čl. 210, st. 1
ZOO) formulisano je tako da obuhvata samo slučajeve u kojima je neosnovano
sticanje nastupilo usled prelaza dela imovine osiromašenog u imovinu obogaćenog
lica. Upotreba tuđe stvari u svoju korist može dovesti do neosnovanog obogaćenja
koje je nastupilo bez imovinskog prelaza. ZOO upotrebu tuđe stvari u svoju korist
uređuje u čl. 219. Potencijalna primena tog člana je široka i može obuhvatiti ne
samo upotrebu tuđe telesne stvari već i vršenje tuđeg prava koje je podobno za ekonomsko
iskorišćavanje. Stoga se upotrebom tuđe stvari u svoju korist može smatrati
i neosnovano vršenje: prava intelektualne svojine, ličnog prava čije vršenje se može
preneti na drugo lice uz naknadu i prava potraživanja. Za razliku od nacionalnih
pravnih poredaka u kojima element obogaćenja nije iscrpno zakonski regulisan,
Principi evropskog prava pravno neosnovanog obogaćenja u čl. 3:101 taksativno
navode njegove pojavne oblike. Osim povećanja aktive, smanjenja pasive, primanja
usluge ili rada obogaćenje se može ogledati i u upotrebi tuđe aktive koja obuhvata
sve ono što ima novčanu vrednost bilo da se radi o pravu ili određenoj poverljivoj
informaciji čiji imalac je ovlašćen da ograniči njenu upotrebu., The institute of Unjust Enrichment was regulated for the first time in the 19th century
in Swiss law. The aim of this institute is to prevent ungrounded enrichment
at the detriment of another. A person who is enriched at the detriment of another
is required to make restitution to the other. Restitution is, therefore, a tool of
corrective justice. To successfully claim unjust enrichment against another person,
a claimant must prove: the existence of other party`s enrichment which is in correlation with the disadvantage on the part of the claimant and the absence of a
legal basis for such enrichment. In Serbia the Law of Contract and Torts regulates
the institute of Unjust Enrichment using the name „Acquiring without ground”
in Articles 210-219. General enrichment action should be applicable to all cases
of unjust enrichment. However, its formulation in Serbian law (Art. 210, para. 1)
applies only to the enrichment occurring as a consequence of a transfer of a part
of a claimant`s property into a property of a defendant. If benefit is acquired without
transferring the property, Art. 210, para. 1 cannot be applied. Use of another`s
thing without authorization can be an example of acquisition of benefit without
transferring the property. The Law of Contract and Torts in Art. 219 regulates using
another person’s object to one’s own benefit. The term object should embrace not
only a corporal thing but every right (absolute or relative) susceptible of commercial
exploitation.
Unlike national rules which usually regulate a general clause of unjust enrichment
in which elements of unjust enrichment are not regulated in detail, Principles of
European Law on Unjustified Enrichment set out a definition based on an exhaustive
enumeration of the types of enrichment and disadvantage. Both enrichment
and disadvantage can occur in different forms. A person is enriched by: an increase
in assets, decrease in liabilities, receiving a service (or having work done), use
of another`s assets. On the other side, a person is disadvantaged by: a decrease in
assets or an increase in liabilities, rendering a service (or doing work), or another`s
use of that person`s assets. Transfer of property is, therefore, not decisive for application
of general rule of unjust enrichment. Use of another`s assets could lead to
the acquisition of benefit relevant to the application of Pel. Unj. Enr. if assets can
be used. In principle, all transferable absolute rights are thus encompassed, such as
property rights including rights to intellectual property. However, the right need
not be capable of transfer and it will suffice that the right is one which another person
might be licensed to use. This will therefore embrace relative rights and nontransferable
absolute rights, such as contractual rights and rights of personality.
Moreover, use of another`s assets will cover one person`s exploitation of another`s
confidential information or an invention or design which might be, but has not yet
been, converted into fully-fledged intellectual property right.",
publisher = "Beograd : Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu Centar za izdavaštvo i informisanje",
journal = "Perspektive implementacije evropskih standarda u pravni sistem Srbije : zbornik radova. Knj. 5 / Perspectives of Implementa tion of European Standards in Serbian Legal System : Volume V",
booktitle = "Upotreba tuđe stvari kao oblik pravno neosnovanog obogaćenja, Use of Another as Assets as a Form of Unjust Enrichment",
pages = "289-275"
}
