Kondikcija i pravno neosnovano obogaćenje

Abstract

Predmet rada predstavlja utvrđivanje odnosa dva instituta - kondikcije i pravno neosnovanog obogaćenja. Iako su nastali u različitim periodima (kondikcija je nastala u antici dok je pravno neosnovano obogaćenje kao poseban pravni institut nastao u XIX veku) oba instituta predstavljaju pravno uobličavanje i konkretizaciju iste ideje koja se sastoji u zabrani neosnovanog sticanja na tuđ račun koju je formulisao rimski pravnik Pomponije (D.12.6.14: Natura aequum est neminem cum alterius detrimento fieri locupletiorem – Po prirodi, pravično je da se niko ne obogati na štetu drugoga). Pored kondikcije, veliki uticaj na stvaranje savremenog instituta pravno neosnovanog obogaćenja imala je i verziona tužba (actio de in rem verso) čiji bitan element predstavlja ostvarena korist na tuđ račun. U onoj meri u kojoj je to potrebno za rasvetljavanje instituta pravno neosnovanog obogaćenja, naše istraživanje usmereno je i na utvrđivanje uticaja koji je verziona tužba imala na njegov nastanak. Razvoj pravnih ustanova odvija se ne samo kroz praktičnu primenu već i kroz uzimanje u obzir uporednopravnih rešenja. Otuda je deo rada posvećen inostranim propisima u materiji pravno neosnovanog obogaćenja (francuskom, italijanskom, austrijskom, nemačkom i anglosaksonskom pravu). S obzirom da Zakon o obligacionim odnosima u čl. 210-219 propisuje institut pravno neosnovanog obogaćenja pod nazivom „sticanje bez osnova“, naše istraživanje usmereno je i na analizu domaćih rešenja i njihove primene u sudskoj praksi. Cilj rada predstavlja ustanovljenje sličnosti i razlika između kondikcione i odgovornosti za obogaćenje. Odgovor na ovo pitanje može biti polazište budućih razmatranja na koji način treba urediti materiju pravno neosnovanog obogaćenja u srpskom pravu kako bi se u praksi sankcionisao što veći broj slučajeva neosnovanog sticanja na tuđ račun.

The thesis aims at determining the relationship between two civil law institutes – Condiction and Unjust Enrichment. The understanding of this relation is not only important from the legal history point of view, but also as a starting point for further research and regulation of the institute in contemporary Serbian law. Although emerged in different periods (Condiction emerged in antiquity, while the Unjust Enrichment emerged in the ninetееnth century), both institutes represent juristic expression and formulation of the same idea – prohibition of ungrounded enrichment on detriment of another that has been formulated by the Roman jurist Pompоnius (D.12.6.14: Natura aequum est neminem cum alterius detrimento fieri locupletiorem – According to the laws of nature, it is just that no one should be enriched by the detriment of another). Along with Condiction, the emergence of the contemporary institute of Unjust Enrichment was greatly influenced by Аction De In Rem Verso, the important element of which is enrichment gained on the detriment of another. Where necessary for better understanding of Unjust Enrichment, the research has been focused also on the determination of influences that Аction De In Rem Verso had to the emergence of Unjust Enrichment. Legal institutes develop not only through application, but also take into account the comparative legal experience. Hence, part of the thesis is dedicated to cross border regulations of the matter (French, Italian, Austrian, German and Anglo-Saxon law). Taking into account that Law on Contracts and Torts prescribes unjust enrichment in Articles 210 to 219, our research is also focused on domestic regulations and their application in court practice. The following methods have been applied: historical, sociological, normative and comparative.