Pravno-povijesni prikaz razvoja regulacije instituta izmoljene posudbe u hrvatskom pravu

The two legal institutes, the precarium, i.e. precarious loan and loan for use are often identified in everyday speech even in the legal context, and revocability is emphasized as the only feature of their differentiation. Taking into account the opinion of legal theorists according to which the legal effect of the precarium can be achieved by applying the rules on borrowing, some of the modern codifications of civil law failed to define the precarious loan as an independent legal institute. Nevertheless, the Croatian legislator, guided by the historical application of the Austrian General Civil Code in the Croatian territory, standardized the institute of the precarious loan by a separate legal provision and thus defined it by the subtype of the contract of loan for use. The very rare use of this institute in legal practice as well as the lack of interest for this institute in modern civil law theory make the nature of this institute still insufficiently clear. A comparative analysis of legal theory, but also of foreign legislation that served as a basis for drafting the legal framework of borrowing in Croatian law will try to determine the features of the precarious loan and point to cases where the application of this institute is particularly opportune. Despite the similarity of the two mentioned legal institutes of loan for use and the precarious loan that will be pointed out in the content, the basic purpose of this research is to emphasize the importance of each institute taking into account the features that distinguish them and confirm that both institutes have their own purpose, practical importance and application in Croatian law.