English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this paper the author analyzes the different points of view on the notion of cause (consideration) in contract in the Serbian doctrine of civil law as until the adoption of the Law on Obligations in 1978. Having in mind that the Law, adhering to the normative solutions of the French Civil Code, explicitly regulates the institution of cause of contract, as one of the conditions of formation and validity of contract, its adoption can certainly be considered as an event of a watershed importance in respect of the analysis of various theoretical points of view on the notion of cause of contract in the Serbian literature. The fact that the institution of cause of contract had not been explicitly regulated in Serbian positive law as until the adoption of Law on Obligations had its effect on the evolution of doctrine in this period in two ways. On one hand, the range of differing theoretical points of view was very wide, covered as good as all the relevant streams in the doctrine of cause, from the ones accepting this institution (so-called causalistic theories) to the ones denying its legal significance in any sense (so-called anticausalistic theories). By the adoption of the Law on Obligations in 1978 the notion of cause of contract became a legal institution in Serbian positive law that had a profound impact on the evolution of doctrine. On one hand, the cause of contract was not a neglectable legal notion any more, therefore it seems entirely logical that there is as good as no authority since then who has not dedicated to the notion of cause of contract an article or two, or at least a separate part in their textbooks. On the other hand, the determination of the legislator to assign the Serbian legal system to the family of legal systems in which the notion of cause of contract is stipulated as one of conditions of formation and validity of contract, led to the shrinkage of the diapason of various, often conflicting, points of view on cause of contract in the Serbian literature. In contrast to the period before the adoption of the Law on Obligations, after its adoption a tendency of abandonment of points of view disavowing any legal relevance of cause of contract can be recognized and the majority of contemporary authorities argue that the cause of contract is a necessary legal institution, although they may differ in the conceptual determination of this notion. In the period after the adoption of the Law on Obligations in the Serbian literature of law of contract many authorities analyzed various aspects of cause of contract, especially Professors Stojan Cigoj, Ljubiša Milošević, Živomir Đorđević, Boris Vizner, Martin Vedriš, Želimir Šmalcelj, Jakov Radišić, Slobodan Perović, Jožef Salma, Oliver Antić and others. The author in this paper gives an overview of the points of view of authorities in the Serbian literature of law contract on the notion of cause of contract who marked the period until the adoption of the Law on Obligations, namely the works of Professors Dragoljub Aranđelović, Živojin Perić, Lazar Marković, Andrija Gams, Stevan Jakšić, Vladimir Kapor and Mihajlo Konstantinović

zbornik radova - pravni fakultet u novom sadu/zbornik radova

Theoretical points of view on the notion of cause (consideration) of contracts in the Serbian doctrine of civil law till the adoption of the law on obligations