Z problematyki winy nieumyślnej jednostki gospodarki nieuspołecznionej
Loading...
Date
1984
Authors
Advisor
Editor
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Wydział Prawa i Administracji UAM
Title alternative
On the problems of unintentional guilt of unit of socialized economy
Abstract
A study of main theses of the resolution 1' 84 of the Council of State Economic
Arbitration setting general guidelines for arbitration decisions in question of
debtor's liability in the relations among the units of socialized economy is a subject
of the article. The resolution was passed in the relation to changes in economic
legislation establishing framework for functioning of the economic reform.
Rules of contractual liability elaborated by arbitration (decisions on the grounds
of the previous resolution departed both from a classical principle of guilt and
from a principle of risk. In any case it was the liability surpassing limits set by
art. 355 par. 2 of the Civil Code. A question can be raised whether, and if yes
then in which direction change in interpretation in liability rules occurend as compared
to the interpretation adopted in the resolution 258.
It can be stated by and large that arbitration returned to the rule of art. 355
par. 2 of the C.C. The working „utmost diligence" was omitted and so was the statement
that an event excluding debtor from liability must be of external origin.
Besides, the resolution under study uses the term of unintentional guilt on describing
a notion" of non observation of a due dilligence". But can we state the
„return" of the principle of guilt in the relations between the socialized units of
economy? It seems that the answer should be negative. There are convincing
arguments that the use of a „guilt" notion in Case of a unit of economy is not
justified on appraising its acting or desistance. If that notion is however used as
a handy epitome, it appears that the most characteristic feature of that legal
category (subjective element of guilt) is altogether omitted on appraising acts of
those units. It can be therefore inferred that contractual liability in relations
between units of economy is of an objective character. The same can also be
related to other legislations of economic law where a controversy on „subjective"
or „objective" character of the interpretation of liability provisions is actually
a dispute on a hierarchy of functions ascribed to those provisions.
Description
Sponsor
Digitalizacja i deponowanie archiwalnych zeszytów RPEiS sfinansowane przez MNiSW w ramach realizacji umowy nr 541/P-DUN/2016
Keywords
Citation
Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny 46, 1984, z. 3, s. 43-60