Prinudni propisi u novijoj domaćoj sudskoj i ugovornoj praksi
Mandatory rules in recent Serbian jurisprudence and contractual practice
dc.creator | Hiber, Dragor | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-05-21T11:22:13Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-05-21T11:22:13Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0003-2565 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1857 | |
dc.description.abstract | Sloboda ugovaranja i dispozitivne norme zakona karakteristične su za ugovorno pravo. Imperativne su izuzetak i njihovo kršenje vodi nevažnosti ugovora ili drugim posledicama. Otuda je u svakom konkretnom slučaju bitno utvrditi da li je norma ugovornog prava koju treba primeniti dispozitivna ili imperativna. U skladu sa slobodom ugovaranja, u zakonu se polazi od pretpostavke da su norme dispozitivne, izuzetak treba utvrditi. U pojedinim slučajevima praksa se kolebala, a sudovi su stav da su u pitanju imperativne norme branili neprihvatljivim argumentom da zakonom nije izričito dozvoljeno drugačije ugovaranje. Suprotno, u pojedine međunarodne ugovore, za koje je kao merodavno ugovoreno pravo Srbije, naročito o prodaji udela u privrednom društvu, sve češće se unose ustanove koje potiču iz anglosaksonskog prava, Representations and Warranties i Put option. Praksa tada nije uvek spremna da prepozna i primeni imperativne norme srpskog prava. U članku se kritički analiziraju primeri takve prakse. | sr |
dc.description.abstract | Freedom of contract and non-mandatory statutory rules are characteristics of the law on contracts. Mandatory provisions are exceptional and their violation leads to the invalidity of contract and other consequences. Freedom of contract assumes that the rules are non-mandatory, while the exception is to be determined. In a number of cases jurisprudence wavered, and the courts tend to defend their position that a rule is mandatory by invoking the unacceptable position that the Statute has not explicitly allowed different contracting. By contrast, Anglo-Saxon legal institutions representations and warranties and put option are often incorporated in international agreements in which Serbias law is accepted as applicable, especially in agreements on the sale of shares in limited liability companies. In such cases the jurisprudence is not always willing to recognise and apply mandatory provisions of Serbias law. In the paper the examples of such practice are subject to a critical analysis. | en |
dc.rights | openAccess | |
dc.source | Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu | |
dc.subject | sloboda ugovaranja | sr |
dc.subject | pretpostavka dispozitivnosti | sr |
dc.subject | napuštanje pretpostavke dispozitivnosti u sudskoj praksi | sr |
dc.subject | imperativne norme | sr |
dc.subject | domaće imperativne norme i preuzete ustanove stranog prava | sr |
dc.subject | mandatory rules | en |
dc.subject | local mandatory rules and institutions transplanted from foreign law | en |
dc.subject | freedom of contract | en |
dc.subject | assumption of non-mandatoriness | en |
dc.subject | abandonment of the assumption of non-mandatoriness in jurisprudence | en |
dc.title | Prinudni propisi u novijoj domaćoj sudskoj i ugovornoj praksi | sr |
dc.title | Mandatory rules in recent Serbian jurisprudence and contractual practice | en |
dc.type | article | |
dc.rights.license | CC BY | |
dc.citation.epage | 476 | |
dc.citation.issue | poseban | |
dc.citation.other | 70(poseban): 451-476 | |
dc.citation.spage | 451 | |
dc.citation.volume | 70 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.51204/Anali_PFBU_22MK16A | |
dc.identifier.fulltext | https://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/id/1921/1850.pdf | |
dc.identifier.rcub | conv_3411 | |
dc.type.version | publishedVersion |