magistrsko delo
Abstract
Magistrsko delo "Prepovedani dogovori pri hipoteki s pregledom sodne prakse" obravnava različne vrste dogovorov, za katere se dogovorita hipotekarni upnik in zastavitelj. Ker je rezultat teh dogovorov navadno okoriščenje ene izmed strank nasproti drugi stranki, jih pravni redi prepovedujejo. Bistveni del (prepovedani dogovori) magistrske naloge je zajet v zadnjem, tretjem poglavju. Poglavje je razdeljeno na štiri različne prepovedane dogovore, kjer so podrobno opisane vse značilnosti teh dogovorov. Pri tem so zajete značilnosti iz zgodovine in današnje pravne ureditve, kakor tudi sodna praksa, ki smo jo podrobno obdelali. Še posebej je razčlenjen komisorni dogovor v povezavi z različnimi oblikami stvarnopravnih zavarovanj. V zadnjem podpoglavju pa sledijo primeri iz sodne prakse, ki pa so že predhodno obravnavani v jedrnem delu prepovedanih dogovorov. Ob temeljitem raziskovanju zakonodaje, teorije in sodne prakse glede razsežnosti prepovedanih dogovorov ugotovimo, da nam odgovor daje prav sodna praksa. Ta je skozi odločitve zavzela enotno stališče, da je prepoved komisornega dogovora potrebno upoštevati, tudi če ne gre za zakonsko določeno obliko stvarnopravnega zavarovanja in ima posel drugačen videz, je pa njegov namen zavarovanje obveznosti. Posledica pa je ničnost vseh teh poslov, saj ni ničen dogovor, ki ga sploh ni, temveč učinek poslov kot celote, ki izigravajo prepoved komisornega dogovora oziroma njegov namen. Pri tem pa je delo sodišč, da vsak posel oz. kombinacijo poslov skrbno presodijo v smislu prepovedi komisornega dogovora. Sodna praksa gre v smeri, da je ključno preprečevanje neopravičene obogatitve, ne pa preprečevanje pridobitve lastninske pravice upnika na stvari, ali uresničitev poplačilne pravice, kot to absolutno velja pri zastavni pravici in je določeno v 132. členu Stvarnopravnega zakonika.
Keywords
prepovedani dogovori;komisorni dogovor;lex commissoria;legis commissoria;dogovor o antihrezi;hipoteka;zastavna pravica;nepremičnina;zavarovana terjatev;sale and lease back;
Data
Language: |
Slovenian |
Year of publishing: |
2021 |
Typology: |
2.09 - Master's Thesis |
Organization: |
UM PF - Faculty of Law |
Publisher: |
R. Toplak] |
UDC: |
347.27(043.3) |
COBISS: |
51790595
|
Views: |
509 |
Downloads: |
101 |
Average score: |
0 (0 votes) |
Metadata: |
|
Other data
Secondary language: |
English |
Secondary title: |
Prohibition agreements relating on mortgage with a review of case law |
Secondary abstract: |
Master's thesis "Prohibited agreements relating on mortgage with a review of case law" discusses different kinds of agreements between mortgage lender and mortgager. These agreements are prohibited by legal orders, since one of the parties usually benefits from them. The essential part (prohibited agreements) of the master's thesis is covered in the last, third chapter. The chapter is divided in four different prohibited agreements with their detailed characteristics description. It captures characteristics from former and today's legal system as well as case law, which is discussed in detail. Especially dissected is legis commissoria in connection to different forms of property law insurances. In the last subchapter are presented case law examples, which are beforehand presented in the core part of prohibited agreements. Upon thorough research of legislation, theory and case law regarding the extent of prohibited agreements, we conclude, that the answer is given to us by case law. Through decisions, case law applies a united point of view that legis commissoria prohibition needs to be abided, even if the property law insurance is not legally defined and the deal looks differently, but its purpose is in insuring the obligation. The consequence is in nullity of adopted deals, because it is not the nonexisting agreement that is worthless, but the effect of all deals that are double crossing the legis commissoria prohibiton and its purpose, respectively. The role of the courts is to carefully judge each case or combination of cases in the terms of legis commissoria. Taking case law into consideration, it is prevention of unjust enrichment that is essential and not the prevention of property right acquisition like that is absolutely valid by security right and is specified in Article 132 of Law of Property Code. |
Secondary keywords: |
prohibited agreements;lex commissoria;legis commissoria;antichresis agreement;mortgage;lien;real estate;secured claim;sale and lease back; |
Type (COBISS): |
Master's thesis/paper |
Pages: |
76 f. |
ID: |
12360752 |