Aleksandra Pavićević
{"title":"RAZGRANIČENjE IZMEĐU REGISTROVANE ZALOGE I FIDUCIJARNOG PRENOSA SVOJINE KAO REALNE GARANCIJE","authors":"Aleksandra Pavićević","doi":"10.46793/xixmajsko.1119p","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The subject of the paper is an analysis of the physiognomy of two institutes with the role of real security of claims, which exist in modern comparative law, namely - registered pledge and fiduciary transfer of property for the purpose of real security of claims. Unlike the registered (stateless) pledge on movable property, which is known by all modern regulations, including domestic law, the fiduciary transfer of property is an unusual real guarantee, which is not regulated in positive Serbian law (nor has it ever been). Nevertheless, this institute has long been familiar with European, and especially German, business (banking) practice, as well as numerous newer regulations. Since the introduction of this institute was proposed by one of the two legal projects drafted so far, which embody the future Serbian civil law (Draft Code of Property and Other Real Rights of Serbia from 2011), the author locates the similarities and differences between the two mentioned institutes, with with the aim of formulating a final assessment on the expediency of introducing this institute into Serbian law de lege ferenda. After the analysis, the author concludes that the fiduciary transfer of property: in terms of content, effect, object, flexibility, multifunctionality and non-accessibility exceeds the purpose of a registered pledge, and with its physiognomy and internal logic embodies a guarantee sui generis, the introduction of which would enrich the range of real guarantees in Serbian law. After all, it is the course of modern European national legislators, but also of supranational EU law, which is significant due to the need to harmonize domestic law with European law.","PeriodicalId":325482,"journal":{"name":"Pravna regulativa usluga u nacionalnim zakonodavstvima i pravu Evropske Unije","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pravna regulativa usluga u nacionalnim zakonodavstvima i pravu Evropske Unije","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46793/xixmajsko.1119p","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的主题是分析现代比较法中存在的两种具有债权实物担保作用的制度,即以债权实物担保为目的的登记质押和以财产信托转让为目的的债权实物担保。与包括国内法在内的所有现代条例都知道的动产登记(无国籍)质押不同,财产的信托转让是一种不寻常的真实担保,塞尔维亚实在法对此没有规定(也从来没有规定)。尽管如此,该机构长期以来一直熟悉欧洲,尤其是德国的商业(银行)实践,以及许多新的法规。由于引入这一制度是由迄今为止起草的两个法律项目之一提出的,这两个法律项目体现了未来的塞尔维亚民法(2011年塞尔维亚财产和其他物权法典草案),因此作者定位了上述两个制度之间的异同,目的是对将这一制度引入塞尔维亚法的权宜性进行最终评估。经过分析,笔者认为财产信托转让在内容、效力、对象、灵活性、多功能性和不可及性等方面都超越了登记质押的目的,以其外观和内在逻辑体现了一种自成担保,其引入将丰富塞尔维亚法律中真实担保的范围。毕竟,这是现代欧洲国家立法者的历程,也是超国家欧盟法的历程,这是重要的,因为需要协调国内法与欧洲法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
RAZGRANIČENjE IZMEĐU REGISTROVANE ZALOGE I FIDUCIJARNOG PRENOSA SVOJINE KAO REALNE GARANCIJE
The subject of the paper is an analysis of the physiognomy of two institutes with the role of real security of claims, which exist in modern comparative law, namely - registered pledge and fiduciary transfer of property for the purpose of real security of claims. Unlike the registered (stateless) pledge on movable property, which is known by all modern regulations, including domestic law, the fiduciary transfer of property is an unusual real guarantee, which is not regulated in positive Serbian law (nor has it ever been). Nevertheless, this institute has long been familiar with European, and especially German, business (banking) practice, as well as numerous newer regulations. Since the introduction of this institute was proposed by one of the two legal projects drafted so far, which embody the future Serbian civil law (Draft Code of Property and Other Real Rights of Serbia from 2011), the author locates the similarities and differences between the two mentioned institutes, with with the aim of formulating a final assessment on the expediency of introducing this institute into Serbian law de lege ferenda. After the analysis, the author concludes that the fiduciary transfer of property: in terms of content, effect, object, flexibility, multifunctionality and non-accessibility exceeds the purpose of a registered pledge, and with its physiognomy and internal logic embodies a guarantee sui generis, the introduction of which would enrich the range of real guarantees in Serbian law. After all, it is the course of modern European national legislators, but also of supranational EU law, which is significant due to the need to harmonize domestic law with European law.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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