Oryginalny artykuł naukowy

Świadczenie niegodziwe – trudne dziedzictwo rzymskiej inspiracji

2017, 72, Numer 1

Wojciech Dajczak

DOI

10.5604/01.3001.0011.7590

Data publikacji

17.04.2018

Model publikowania

open access

Rodzaj licencji

CC BY 4.0 Int.

Dziedzina

Prawo

Dyscyplina

nauki prawne

Język publikacji

Polski

Pliki do pobrania

PDF 416 KB

Artykuł

Liczba wyświetleń:192

Liczba pobrań:37

Cytowania Crossref:0

Wynik Altmetric:0

Abstrakt

Incorporating the rules inspired by the Roman condictio ob turpem causam into modern regulations of unjustified enrichment provokes criticism. Such regulations are diversified into several models but mostly invoke controversies. The main goal of this paper is evaluating these critical opinions and doubts repeated in legal discourse using historical and comparative methods. Author focuses on five issues: usefulness of condictio ob turpem causam in the light of works of ius commune jurists; doubts concerning the principle in pari turpitudine melior est conditio possidentis; different approach of various European legislators to the idea of condictio ob turpem causam; relation between regulations of unjustified enrichment and unenforceability of agreements contrary to the o law and good customs; importance of the restitution of payments contrary to the law and good customs for today’s legal practice. The conclusions of such analysis allow to admit that doubts concerning the continuation of the Roman condictio ob turpem causam are justified. From the other side, in times of multicultural societies and increasing number of legal regulations the growth of disputes resulted from the payments contrary to law and good customs can be observed. The rejection of repayment based on the contrary to the objective good faith offers – according to the author – the best compromise between weak points of Roman condictio ob turpem causam and challenges of modern practice. In the legal reasoning it is expressed by the maxime „no one shall be heard, who invokes his own guilt”.Incorporating of this maxime into the unjustified enrichment is all the more justified when higher could be in legal practice doubts concerning the acceptability of rejection of restitution of the payment with has been made without legal ground but in the contrary to the principle of good faith.

Słowa kluczowe:

Bibliografia

Alpa G., Chiodi G. (red.), Il progetto italo-francese di codice delle obbligazioni e dei contratti, Milano 2007

Baldus de Ubaldis, Commentaria in secundam Digesti Veteris partem, Venetiis 1627

Bartolus de Saxoferrato, Commentaria, 1516, edizione anastatica, Roma 1996, Vol. II

Brunnemannm J., Commentarius in Pandectas, t. I, Lugduni 1714

Corpus Iuris Civilis cum commentariis Accursii, scholiis Contii et D. Gothofredi, Lugduni 1627, Vol. I

Dajczak W., La libertà di applicazione della clausola generale della buona fede: osservazioni sulla prospettiva del diritto romano, (w:) L. Garofalo (red.), Il ruolo della buona fede oggettiva nell’esperienza giuridica storica e contemporanea, t. I, Milano 2003

Domat J., Les loix civiles dans leur ordre naturel, t. 1, Paris 1777

Donellus H., Commentarii de Iure Civili, t. I, Antverpiae 1642

Flejszyc E. A., Zobowiązania z tytułu wyrządzenia szkody i niesłusznego wzbogacenie, Warszawa 1954 (tłum. A. Puszka, W. Warkałło)

Gambaro A., Abuse of rights in civil law tradition, „European Review of Private Law” 1995, Vol. 3, issue 4

Glück Chr., Ausführliche Erläuterung der Pandeckten nach Hellfeld ein Commentar, t. 13, Erlangen 1811

Hallebeek J., The Concept of Unjust Enrichment in Late Scholasticism, Nijmegen 1996

Honsell H., Die Rückabwicklung sittenwidriger oder verbotener Geschäfte, München 1974

Höpfner L. J. F., Theoretsch-praktischer Commentar über die Heineccischen Institutionen, Frankfurt am Main 1803

Jakobs H. H., Schubert W. (red.), Die Beratung des Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuches in systematischer Zusammenstellung der unveröffentlichten Quellen, § 652 bis 853, Berlin–New York 1983

Księżak P., Świadczenie niegodziwe, Warszawa 2007

Kupisch B., Ungerechtfertige Bereicherung. Geschichtliche Entwicklungen, Heidelberg 1987

Łętowska E., Bezpodstawne wzbogacenie w prawie i piśmiennictwie radzieckim, „Studia Cywlistyczne” 1988, t. 34

Longchamps de Bérier F., L’abuso del diritto nell’esperienza del diritto privato, Torino 2013

Longchamps de Bérier R., Uzasadnienie projektu kodeksu zobowiązań z uwzględnieniem ostatecznego tekstu kodeksu, art. 1–167, z. 4, Warszawa 1934

Ohanowicz A., Niesłuszne zbogacenie, Warszawa 1956

Ohanowicz A., Wengerek E., Przepadek niegodziwego świadczenia (na tle wytycznych Sądu Najwyższego), (w:) Alfred Ohanowicz. Wybór prac, Warszawa 2007

Pauw A., De condictione ob turpem vel iniustam causam, Trajecti ad Rhenum 1727

Pothier R., Traité des obligations, t. I, Paris‒Orléans 1768

Schubert W. (red.), Die Vorentwürfe der Redaktoren zum BGB, Teil 3, Besonderer Teil II (Verfasser: Franz Philipp von Kübler und Hilfsarbeiter), Berlin–New York 1980

Schwab D., § 817 BGB, (w:) Münchener Kommentar. Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, t. 5, München 2013

Sobczyk M., Świadczenie w zamierzonym celu, który nie został osiągnięty, Toruń 2012

Struve G. A., Syntagma Iuris Civilis, Jenae 1702

Terré F., Simler Ph., Lequette Y., Droit civil. Les obligations, Paris 2002

Voet J., Commentarius ad Pandectas, t. I, Hagae–Comitum 1707

von Savigny F. C., (w:) Chr. Wollschläger, J. Rückert (red.), Landrechtvorlesung 1824. Drei Nachschriften, Zweier Halbband. Obligationen. Familienrecht. Erbrecht, Frankfurt am Main 1998

Wesenbeck M., Commentarii in Pandectas Juris Civilis et Codiem Justinianeum olim dicta Paratitla, Amstelodami 1665

Zimmermann R., The Law of Obligations. Roman Foundations of the Civilian Tradition, Oxford 1996

Zoesius H., Commentarius ad Digestorum seu Pandectorum Iuris Civilis, Lovanni 1656