{"title":"释放“准入”债务:被遗忘的Skice机构债券和合同法","authors":"Marija Karanikić Mirić","doi":"10.51204/anali_pfbu_22mk14a","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"All the provisions of the Yugoslav, and subsequently Serbian, Law on Obligations of 1978 relating to substitution of debtor, originate from the Draft Code on Obligations and Contracts of 1969. However, the rule according to which the creditor and the third party may expressly discharge the original debtor was omitted from the Law. The reasons for this exclusion have not been recorded. Also, the Draft fails to specify whether the original debtor may protest their own release, i.e., if their consent is necessary for the discharge. This article has two purposes: to explore how the ideas of Mihailo Konstantinović, the sole author of the Draft, on the subject of substitution of debtor developed over time, and to examine the omitted rule on liberatory “accession” to debt or, more precisely, the assumption of debt by agreement between the creditor and a third party.","PeriodicalId":32310,"journal":{"name":"Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Oslobađajuće „pristupanje“ dugu: zaboravljeni institut iz Skice za zakonik o obligacijama i ugovorima\",\"authors\":\"Marija Karanikić Mirić\",\"doi\":\"10.51204/anali_pfbu_22mk14a\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"All the provisions of the Yugoslav, and subsequently Serbian, Law on Obligations of 1978 relating to substitution of debtor, originate from the Draft Code on Obligations and Contracts of 1969. However, the rule according to which the creditor and the third party may expressly discharge the original debtor was omitted from the Law. The reasons for this exclusion have not been recorded. Also, the Draft fails to specify whether the original debtor may protest their own release, i.e., if their consent is necessary for the discharge. This article has two purposes: to explore how the ideas of Mihailo Konstantinović, the sole author of the Draft, on the subject of substitution of debtor developed over time, and to examine the omitted rule on liberatory “accession” to debt or, more precisely, the assumption of debt by agreement between the creditor and a third party.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32310,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51204/anali_pfbu_22mk14a\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51204/anali_pfbu_22mk14a","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Oslobađajuće „pristupanje“ dugu: zaboravljeni institut iz Skice za zakonik o obligacijama i ugovorima
All the provisions of the Yugoslav, and subsequently Serbian, Law on Obligations of 1978 relating to substitution of debtor, originate from the Draft Code on Obligations and Contracts of 1969. However, the rule according to which the creditor and the third party may expressly discharge the original debtor was omitted from the Law. The reasons for this exclusion have not been recorded. Also, the Draft fails to specify whether the original debtor may protest their own release, i.e., if their consent is necessary for the discharge. This article has two purposes: to explore how the ideas of Mihailo Konstantinović, the sole author of the Draft, on the subject of substitution of debtor developed over time, and to examine the omitted rule on liberatory “accession” to debt or, more precisely, the assumption of debt by agreement between the creditor and a third party.