OCHRONA UPRAWNIONEGO Z TYTUŁU PRAWA PIERWOKUPU PRZED POZORNYMI OŚWIADCZENIAMI WOLI
Loading...
Date
2013
Authors
Advisor
Editor
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Wydział Prawa i Administracji UAM
Title alternative
PROTECTION OF THE ENTITLED TO THE RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL AGAINST AN APPARENT DECLARATION OF WILL
Abstract
Prawo pierwokupu (art. 596 i n. k.c.) kreuje po stronie zobowiązanego obowiązek sprzedaży rzeczy osobie trzeciej pod warunkiem, że uprawniony ze swego prawa nie skorzysta. Uprawniony z prawa pierwokupu ma zaś możliwość złożenia oświadczenia, że ze swego prawa korzysta. W wyniku złożenia oświadczenia o skorzystaniu z prawa pierwokupu dochodzi do zawarcia umowy między zobowiązanym a uprawnionym na warunkach co do zasady takich, jak te określone w umowie między zobowiązanym a osobą trzecią.
Zobowiązany i osoba trzecia mogą na różne sposoby próbować pozbawić uprawnionego jego prawa albo możliwości skorzystania z niego. Jednym z nich jest zawieranie umów pozornych przez zobowiązanego z osobą trzecią. Celem artykułu była próba ustalenia, jakie środki prawne do ochrony przed takimi umowami przysługują uprawnionemu.
Szczególne środki przewidziane w Kodeksie cywilnym do ochrony uprawnionego z tytułu prawa pierwokupu okazują się zawodne w wypadku zawarcia pozornej umowy przez zobowiązanego z osobą trzecią. Uzyskanie odszkodowania na podstawie art. 599 § 1 k.c. wymagałoby przeprowadzenia niezwykle trudnego dowodu pozorności, a instrument określony w art. 600 § 1 zd. 2 k.c. w ogóle nie znajduje zastosowania. Bardzo ograniczone są też możliwości korzystania z domniemań faktycznych dla udowodnienia złej wiary zobowiązanego i osoby trzeciej. Nietypowe postępowanie stron (np. zastrzeżenie rażąco nieekwiwalentnej ceny) tylko wtedy może stanowić przesłankę takiego domniemania, gdy strony nie mogą podać żadnego racjonalnego powodu swego postępowania.
***The right of first refusal within the meaning of article 596 of the Civil Code creates an obligation on the part of the obligor to sell a thing to a third party on condition that the party entitled to the right of first refusal has not exercised the said right. The party entitled to the right may confirm the intention to exercise the right by making a declaration of will. Once such a declaration has been made, a contract between the obligor and the entitled party is deemed concluded on the same terms and conditions as provided for in the contract entered into by the obligor and a third party. Both the obligor and a third party may seek to deprive the entitled party of the right, or the possibility of exercising it. They may, for instance, enter into an apparent contract between themselves. The aim of this paper is to establish the legal remedies that are available to the entitled party to protect against such apparent contracts. The specific measures provided in the Civil Code for the protection of the party entitled to a right of first refusal prove inadequate in the event when an apparent contract between the obligor and a third party. A successful claim for compensation under article 599 § 1 of the Civil Code would require a very difficult test for the ‘evidence of apparency’ while the instrument referred to in article 600 § 1 clause 2 of the Civil Code does not apply at all. There are also limitations of the possibility of relying on the presumption of fact principle in establishing the ill-faith of the obligor and a third party, while an unusual conduct of parties (e.g. stipulation of a grossly inadequate consideration) may constitute a premise for the presumption of ill-faith of the parties only if they are unable to provide a reasonable rationale for such conduct.
***The right of first refusal within the meaning of article 596 of the Civil Code creates an obligation on the part of the obligor to sell a thing to a third party on condition that the party entitled to the right of first refusal has not exercised the said right. The party entitled to the right may confirm the intention to exercise the right by making a declaration of will. Once such a declaration has been made, a contract between the obligor and the entitled party is deemed concluded on the same terms and conditions as provided for in the contract entered into by the obligor and a third party. Both the obligor and a third party may seek to deprive the entitled party of the right, or the possibility of exercising it. They may, for instance, enter into an apparent contract between themselves. The aim of this paper is to establish the legal remedies that are available to the entitled party to protect against such apparent contracts. The specific measures provided in the Civil Code for the protection of the party entitled to a right of first refusal prove inadequate in the event when an apparent contract between the obligor and a third party. A successful claim for compensation under article 599 § 1 of the Civil Code would require a very difficult test for the ‘evidence of apparency’ while the instrument referred to in article 600 § 1 clause 2 of the Civil Code does not apply at all. There are also limitations of the possibility of relying on the presumption of fact principle in establishing the ill-faith of the obligor and a third party, while an unusual conduct of parties (e.g. stipulation of a grossly inadequate consideration) may constitute a premise for the presumption of ill-faith of the parties only if they are unable to provide a reasonable rationale for such conduct.
Description
Sponsor
Keywords
prawo cywilne,, prawo pierwokupu,, pozorność oświadczeń woli,, dobra wiara, civil law,, right of first refusal,, good faith
Citation
Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny 75, 2013, z. 1, s. 29-42