Show simple item record

The legal insignificance of the financial coverage at the bill of exchange and the cheque

dc.creatorJanković, Svetislav
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-11T15:14:49Z
dc.date.available2024-03-11T15:14:49Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn0003-2565
dc.identifier.urihttps://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1228
dc.description.abstractS 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.sr
dc.description.abstractDue 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.en
dc.publisherUniverzitet u Beogradu - Pravni fakultet, Beograd
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.sourceAnali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu
dc.subjectstipulacijasr
dc.subjectpokrićesr
dc.subjectmenicasr
dc.subjectčeksr
dc.subjectapstraktnostsr
dc.subjectstipulatioen
dc.subjectcoverageen
dc.subjectchequeen
dc.subjectbill of exchangeen
dc.subjectabstractivenessen
dc.titlePravni (be)značaj pokrića kod menice i čekasr
dc.titleThe legal insignificance of the financial coverage at the bill of exchange and the chequeen
dc.typearticle
dc.rights.licenseBY
dc.citation.epage178
dc.citation.issue3
dc.citation.other68(3): 159-178
dc.citation.rankM24
dc.citation.spage159
dc.citation.volume68
dc.identifier.doi10.5937/AnaliPFB2003172J
dc.identifier.fulltexthttps://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/id/194/1225.pdf
dc.identifier.rcubconv_525
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record