Assignment of a Claim Under an Obligation in Which the Identity of the Obligee Is Essential for the Obligor

Предпринимательское, Право, Семейное Право, Международное Частное Право
{"title":"Assignment of a Claim Under an Obligation in Which the Identity of the Obligee Is Essential for the Obligor","authors":"Предпринимательское, Право, Семейное Право, Международное Частное Право","doi":"10.19073/2658-7602-2020-17-4-455-464","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation adopted a resolution of December 21, 2017 No. 54 “On some issues of application of the provisions of Chapter 24 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on the change of persons in an obligation on the basis of a transaction\", which sets out important clarifications regarding the application standards contained in this chapter. At the same time, not all issues related to the assignment of the claim were resolved by the above resolution. One of these issues is the definition of the term “essential value of the identity of the creditor” or approximate criteria for such a value in the context of the need to obtain the latter’s consent to the assignment of rights. The presence of this problem is rightly indicated in the scientific literature [3, p. 549–655, 688–713]. The Author examines the Model Rules of European Private Law and the UNIDROIT principles in order to find a solution to the problem. Attention is drawn to the problem of determining the essential value of the creditor for the debtor in the case of assignment of the right of claim, as well as to the consequences of making the assignment without the consent of the debtor under an obligation in which the identity of the creditor was essential.In the Author's opinion, the identity of the creditor is recognized as essential for the debtor when the connection between the debtor and the creditor arose as a result of the conclusion of a transaction that has a personallyconfidential nature, or if the connection arose during the conclusion of other transactions in the case when the connection was broken during the execution assignment of rights entails or may entail a significant deprivation for the debtor of what he had the right to count on when concluding a transaction with the creditor.In addition, situations are considered that are an exception to the presumption of the absence of a significant value of the creditor's personality for the assignment of claims for monetary obligations. The author also points out that the consequence of the transaction on the assignment of rights without the consent of the debtor in the context of paragraph 2 of Art. 388 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is the nullity of the transaction on the basis of paragraph 2 of Art. 168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.","PeriodicalId":33294,"journal":{"name":"Sibirskoe iuridicheskoe obozrenie","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sibirskoe iuridicheskoe obozrenie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19073/2658-7602-2020-17-4-455-464","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation adopted a resolution of December 21, 2017 No. 54 “On some issues of application of the provisions of Chapter 24 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on the change of persons in an obligation on the basis of a transaction", which sets out important clarifications regarding the application standards contained in this chapter. At the same time, not all issues related to the assignment of the claim were resolved by the above resolution. One of these issues is the definition of the term “essential value of the identity of the creditor” or approximate criteria for such a value in the context of the need to obtain the latter’s consent to the assignment of rights. The presence of this problem is rightly indicated in the scientific literature [3, p. 549–655, 688–713]. The Author examines the Model Rules of European Private Law and the UNIDROIT principles in order to find a solution to the problem. Attention is drawn to the problem of determining the essential value of the creditor for the debtor in the case of assignment of the right of claim, as well as to the consequences of making the assignment without the consent of the debtor under an obligation in which the identity of the creditor was essential.In the Author's opinion, the identity of the creditor is recognized as essential for the debtor when the connection between the debtor and the creditor arose as a result of the conclusion of a transaction that has a personallyconfidential nature, or if the connection arose during the conclusion of other transactions in the case when the connection was broken during the execution assignment of rights entails or may entail a significant deprivation for the debtor of what he had the right to count on when concluding a transaction with the creditor.In addition, situations are considered that are an exception to the presumption of the absence of a significant value of the creditor's personality for the assignment of claims for monetary obligations. The author also points out that the consequence of the transaction on the assignment of rights without the consent of the debtor in the context of paragraph 2 of Art. 388 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is the nullity of the transaction on the basis of paragraph 2 of Art. 168 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
债权人身份对债务人至关重要的债务项下债权的转让
俄罗斯联邦最高法院全体会议通过了2017年12月21日第54号决议“关于适用《俄罗斯联邦民法典》第24章关于在交易的基础上变更义务的人的规定的一些问题”,该决议对本章所载的适用标准作出了重要澄清。同时,上述决议并没有解决与转让索赔有关的所有问题。其中一个问题是“债权人身份的基本价值”一词的定义,或在需要取得债权人同意转让权利的情况下,这种价值的大致标准。科学文献正确地指出了这个问题的存在[3,第549-655页,688-713页]。笔者考察了《欧洲私法示范规则》和《统法协原则》,以期找到解决这一问题的办法。提请注意在债权转让的情况下,确定债权人对债务人的基本价值的问题,以及在债权人身份至关重要的义务下未经债务人同意进行转让的后果。作者认为,当债务人和债权人之间的联系是由于达成一项具有个人机密性质的交易而产生时,债权人的身份被认为对债务人至关重要。或者,如果在缔结其他交易期间产生联系,则在执行权利转让期间中断联系的情况下,债务人在与债权人缔结交易时享有的权利将被严重剥夺或可能被严重剥夺。此外,对于转让货币债务的债权,债权人的人格不具有重大价值这一推定的例外情况也予以考虑。发件人还指出,根据《俄罗斯联邦民法典》第388条第2款进行的未经债务人同意转让权利的交易的后果是根据《俄罗斯联邦民法典》第168条第2款进行的交易无效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
21 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信