Open AccessON ACCESSORY OBLIGATIONS IN RUSSIAN CIVIL LAW
Author(s) -
R. Truhan
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
evrazijskij soûz učenyh/evrazijskij soûz učënyh
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2413-9335
pISSN - 2411-6467
DOI - 10.31618/esu.2413-9335.2021.7.82.1248
Subject(s) - obligation , civil law (civil law) , law , political science , arbitration , institution , subject (documents) , de facto , unjust enrichment , public law , sociology , computer science , restitution , library science
In the science of civil law, two approaches to the understanding and interpretation of accessory have been formed. The first approach can be defined as the understanding of accessory in the "narrow" sense, the second - in the "broad" sense. Russian civil law contains signs of accessory in the "narrow" sense. For this reason, the problem of the concept of "accessory" is seen, which is subject to the identification of an accessory legal relationship with a security obligation, which in turn impoverishes the idea of the role of accessory in the system of legal relationships. With the development of circulation and the complication of law, examples of accessory legal relations of a different kind appeared that were not related to security obligations, i.e. "Broad" understanding of accessory, which has an auxiliary, secondary nature of the obligation, which can not always have a security focus. Russian arbitration courts have developed a number of rules to make up for the shortcomings of the institution of accessory in Russian civil law, and the possibility of using accessory in the "broad" sense. It is concluded that de jure the concept of accessory in Russian civil law is reflected in the "narrow" sense, and de facto, accessory is applied in the "broad" sense.