Obim odgovornosti naslednika za ostaviočeve dugove u nemačkom i srpskom pravu

Abstract

Autor poredi dva sistema odgovornosti naslednika za ostaviočeve dugove: nemački, koji polazi od principa neograničene odgovornosti s mogućnošću da se ona predmetno ograniči uvođenjem uprave ili otvaranjem stečaja nad ostavinskom masom i srpski u kojem je odgovornost naslednika za ostaviočeve dugove ex lege vrednosno organičena. Nakon analize različitih interesa koji se prepliću kod odgovornosti naslednika za ostaviočeve dugove (interes naslednika, interes ostaviočevih poverilaca i interes naslednikovih ličnih poverilaca), autor zaključuje da bi u srpskom pravu kao pravilo trebalo da važi neograničena odgovornost naslednika za ostaviočeve dugove, uz mogućnost da se ta odgovornost predmetno ograniči, kako na zahtev ostaviočevih poverilaca, tako i na zahtev naslednika.

The author compares two systems of liability of heirs for the debts of the deceased: The German system starts from the idea of unrestricted liability of legal heirs for the debts of the estate they inherited, allowing for the possibility of limiting heirs’ liability by appointing an executor or administrator of the estate, or by instituting insolvency proceedings over the estate. In opposition, under the rules of Serbian law on inheritance, liability of heirs for the debts of the deceased is limited in value by virtue of law. After a thorough analysis of the various interest involved (the respective interests of heirs, creditors of the deceased, and personal creditors of the heirs), the author recommends a change to the Serbian system, in the sense that unrestricted liability of heirs for the debts of the deceased should be accepted as a matter of principle, with the possibility of limiting their liability with regard to its object, at the request of either the heirs, or the creditors of the deceased.