现代法学中REM条件与版本的关系

A. Stefanović
{"title":"现代法学中REM条件与版本的关系","authors":"A. Stefanović","doi":"10.5937/gakv95-37706","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, the author analyses a lawsuit for unjust enrichment through the prism of two institutes: condictio and actio de in rem verso. The origin of these two notions is linked to Roman law, although their essence has been drastically changed in modern law. It is necessary to determine them in relation to other lawsuits in order to further clarify the boundaries of these institutes through negative definitions as a preliminary step in this presentation. It is necessary to determine their mutual similarities and differences, as well as different understandings of the institutes, depending on the point of view of the legal system in terms of regulating the lawsuit for unjust enrichment, in order to adequately compare them. Comparative law and dogmatic methods were used in the paper.","PeriodicalId":52738,"journal":{"name":"Glasnik Advokatske komore Vojvodine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The relationship between condictio and version in REM in modern law\",\"authors\":\"A. Stefanović\",\"doi\":\"10.5937/gakv95-37706\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper, the author analyses a lawsuit for unjust enrichment through the prism of two institutes: condictio and actio de in rem verso. The origin of these two notions is linked to Roman law, although their essence has been drastically changed in modern law. It is necessary to determine them in relation to other lawsuits in order to further clarify the boundaries of these institutes through negative definitions as a preliminary step in this presentation. It is necessary to determine their mutual similarities and differences, as well as different understandings of the institutes, depending on the point of view of the legal system in terms of regulating the lawsuit for unjust enrichment, in order to adequately compare them. Comparative law and dogmatic methods were used in the paper.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52738,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Glasnik Advokatske komore Vojvodine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Glasnik Advokatske komore Vojvodine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5937/gakv95-37706\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Glasnik Advokatske komore Vojvodine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5937/gakv95-37706","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

本文从条件诉和对物反诉两个角度分析了一起不当得利诉讼。这两个概念的起源与罗马法有关,尽管它们的本质在现代法律中已经发生了巨大的变化。有必要确定它们与其他诉讼的关系,以便通过负面定义进一步澄清这些机构的界限,作为本报告的初步步骤。从规制不当得利诉讼的法律制度角度出发,有必要确定两者之间的异同以及对制度的不同理解,以便对两者进行充分的比较。本文采用了比较法和教条法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The relationship between condictio and version in REM in modern law
In this paper, the author analyses a lawsuit for unjust enrichment through the prism of two institutes: condictio and actio de in rem verso. The origin of these two notions is linked to Roman law, although their essence has been drastically changed in modern law. It is necessary to determine them in relation to other lawsuits in order to further clarify the boundaries of these institutes through negative definitions as a preliminary step in this presentation. It is necessary to determine their mutual similarities and differences, as well as different understandings of the institutes, depending on the point of view of the legal system in terms of regulating the lawsuit for unjust enrichment, in order to adequately compare them. Comparative law and dogmatic methods were used in the paper.
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
14
审稿时长
12 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