In the Article 52 of the Constitution of Croatia, cultural goods are declared as goods of special interest to the Republic of Croatia that enjoy the special protection of the state. Article 69 of the ...Constitution stipulates that, among other things, the state protects cultural goods as spiritual national values. Article 89 of the Constitution of Serbia determines the obligation of every person to preserve, among other things, cultural heritage as an asset of general interest. The authors believe that something similar exists in most modern legal systems. Various legal subjects own many cultural goods. Still, given their status and the special protection they enjoy, the owners of such goods are subject to certain ownership restrictions and have obligations that owners of most other things do not have. In this paper, the authors will analyze Croatian and Serbian legal acts that regulate the protection of cultural goods with special reference to restrictions of ownership rights over cultural goods in these two countries. There are certain similarities but also some differences in how the protection of cultural goods is regulated in Croatia and Serbia. The types of cultural goods and their protection vary in certain ways, as well as the rights and obligations of owners of cultural goods.
U 21. stoljeću možemo reći da živimo u »novom normalnom« vremenu, kada pravo – i općenito čovjekov život – promatramo kroz prizmu sveprisutne digitalne tehnologije. Digitalna tehnologija već duže ...vrijeme uvelike utječe na kompletno društveno funkcioniranje, a samim time i na tradicionalne institute građanskog prava, kao što su pravo vlasništva, nasljeđivanje i sklapanje ugovora. Tehnologija ove institute dovodi u novo, digitalno, okruženje, pri čemu je potrebno uvažavati posebnosti tog okruženja. Načelo dispozitivnosti jedno je od temeljnih načela građanskog prava koje posebno do izražaja dolazi prilikom sklapanja klasičnih ugovora obveznog prava. Nasuprot tome, adhezijski ugovori su ugovori čiji sadržaj diktira jedna strana, dok ih druga strana može samo prihvatiti ili odbiti – take it or leave it. U kontekstu adhezijskih ugovora, jasno je da sloboda ugovaranja može, u određenim slučajevima, biti narušena. U današnje vrijeme, ogroman broj ovakvih ugovora sklapa se putem informatičke mreže. Radi se o ugovorima na koje svaki korisnik web stranice mora pristati da bi je mogao koristiti. Problem nedostatka mogućnosti izbora onoga tko pristaje na unaprijed objavljene uvjete poslovanja jedne strane, kod ovakvih adhezijskih ugovora može doći do izražaja i više nego kod klasičnih adhezijskih ugovora. Naime, zbog nekih obilježja ovakvih ugovora, korisnici web stranice ponekada nisu ni svjesni da su nekim svojim ponašanjem pristali na uvjete poslovanja pružatelja internetskih usluga, kome pripada ta stranica. Samim time, ti korisnici ne znaju ni na što su pristali, sve dok ne nastanu problemi u odnosu između njih i pružatelja usluga. Ovom problemu svakako pridonosi i ponašanje ugovornih strana ovakvih ugovora, pri čemu se pružatelji internetskih usluga ponekada trude većinu odredaba u ugovoru okrenuti u svoju korist te prividno umanjiti važnosti tih ugovora, dok korisnici to ignoriraju i pristaju na sve ponuđeno, ponekada ni ne znajući da su uopće dali svoje pristanak.
In the 21st century, we live in what can be called a “new normal” when we view law through the prism of digital technology. Technology has greatly impacted the traditional parts of civil law, such as law of ownership, inheritance and contracts. Technology is bringing civil law into a new, digital environment where it is necessary to consider the specifics of that environment. The freedom of contract is the basic principle of civil law, which is mainly applied in the law of obligations, in the part concerning contracts. In contrast, adhesion contracts are contracts in which the terms are dictated by one party, while the other party can only accept or reject them – take it or leave it. In the context of adhesion contracts, it is clear that freedom of contract can be violated in certain cases. Nowadays, a large number of such contracts are concluded online. Every user of a website must agree to these contracts in order to use that website. The problem of the lack of choice of the person who agrees to the pre-announced conditions in such adhesion contracts may be more pronounced online than in classical adhesion contracts. Due to certain characteristics of such contracts, users are sometimes not even aware that by their mere behaviour they have agreed to the terms and conditions of the Internet service provider (ISP) to which the website belongs. As a result, these users do not know what they have agreed to until problems arise between them and an ISP. The behaviour of the contracting parties certainly contributes to this problem. ISPs sometimes try to turn most of the provisions of the contract in their favour and diminish their importance, while users ignore this and agree to everything that is offered to them, sometimes not even knowing that they have given their consent.
In the 21st century, we live in what can be called a “new normal” when we view law through the prism of digital technology. Technology has greatly impacted the traditional parts of civil law, such as ...law of ownership, inheritance and contracts. Technology is bringing civil law into a new, digital environment where it is necessary to consider the specifics of that environment. The freedom of contract is the basic principle of civil law, which is mainly applied in the law of obligations, in the part concerning contracts. In contrast, adhesion contracts are contracts in which the terms are dictated by one party, while the other party can only accept or reject them – take it or leave it. In the context of adhesion contracts, it is clear that freedom of contract can be violated in certain cases. Nowadays, a large number of such contracts are concluded online. Every user of a website must agree to these contracts in order to use that website. The problem of the lack of choice of the person who agrees to the pre-announced conditions in such adhesion contracts may be more pronounced online than in classical adhesion contracts. Due to certain characteristics of such contracts, users are sometimes not even aware that by their mere behaviour they have agreed to the terms and conditions of the Internet service provider (ISP) to which the website belongs. As a result, these users do not know what they have agreed to until problems arise between them and an ISP. The behaviour of the contracting parties certainly contributes to this problem. ISPs sometimes try to turn most of the provisions of the contract in their favour and diminish their importance, while users ignore this and agree to everything that is offered to them, sometimes not even knowing that they have given their consent.
Forced share: In kind or in value? Dubravka, Klasicek
Zbornik radova (Pravni fakultet u Novom Sadu),
2013, Letnik:
47, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
This paper deals with the legal nature of forced share which can be two-sided - forced share as a property right (forced share in kind), like it exists in Croatia and forced share as a money claim ...(forced share in value), like it exists in some European countries. The paper outlines basic characteristics of both of these systems, their advantages and disadvantages, it brings the overview of forced share as a money claim in certain European countries, it lists the standpoints of different authors that have written about this topic and it brings suggestions of possible changes concerning the legal nature of forced share in Croatia.
Organizator svake, pa tako i sportske priredbe, za štetu koju gledatelji pretrpe zbog izvanrednih okolnosti, kao što su nekontrolirano i iznenadno kretanje mase, opći nered, lažna uzbuna, tučnjava ...među navijačima, eksplozija i dim prilikom korištenja navijačkih rekvizita, prevelik broja gledatelja i sl., koje se na takvim priredbama mogu dogoditi, odgovara po pravilima iz čl. 1081. ZOO-a. Ove okolnosti možda jesu izvanredne, no nikako nisu nepredvidive, neizbježne i neuklonjive pa ne ulaze u područje više sile. Ako zbog tih okolnosti gledatelju sportskog natjecanja nastane šteta, organizator će za nju odgovarati samo zato što je organiziranjem priredbe stvorio rizik da neki događaj, koji možda sam po sebi ne predstavlja štetnu radnju, dovede do značajne štete. Različita su tumačenja ove vrste odgovornosti, no neovisno o tome, jasno je da ona postoji kako bi olakšala položaj oštećenika u slučaju kada on trpi štetu koja je nastala u takvim okolnostima zbog kojih će mu biti teško, ponekada i nemoguće, dokazati od koga ili čega šteta potječe. U radu će biti govora o mogućim uzrocima štete koja može nastati gledatelju na sportskom natjecanju, o pravnoj prirodi organizatorove odgovornosti, njezinim pretpostavkama i razlozima isključenja odgovornosti. Rad također donosi iscrpan pregled starije i novije sudske prakse koja se odnosi, kako na odgovornost upravo organizatora sportskih natjecanja, tako i na odgovornosti organizatora ostalih vrsta priredbi.
According to Art. 1081 of Law of Obligations, organizer of every event, including a sporting event, is liable for the damages that might occur to viewers due to extraordinary circumstances, which may happen on such events (such as uncontrolled and sudden movement of people, disorderly behavior, false alarm, scuffle among fans, explosion and smoke when using fan props, too many viewers, etc.). These circumstances may be extraordinary, but they are, by no means, unpredictable, inevitable or unrepairable, so they are not considered to be vis maior. If, due to these circumstances, spectator of a sporting event suffers damages, the organizer will be liable for it, because, by organizing such an event, he/she created a risk that an occurrence, which may not in itself constitute a harmful action, causes significant damage. There are different interpretations of this kind of liability, but regardless of those views, it is clear that it exists to alleviate the position of the injured party, if he/she suffers damages caused by extraordinary circumstances because of which it would be difficult, sometimes even impossible, to prove who or what actually caused the damage.
This paper will discuss possible causes of damages to the spectator in sporting events, legal nature of this type of liability, its prerequisites and reasons for exclusion of organizer’s liability. This paper will also provide a comprehensive overview of older and recent court decisions that relate to the liability of the organizers of sporting events, but also to the liability of organizers of other types of events.
U Hrvatskoj istospolni partneri svoju zajednicu mogu sklopiti samo kao de facto zajednicu te će ona kao takva proizvoditi određene učinke, ako su ispunjene zakonom predviđene pretpostavke. Ipak, ...mogućnost nasljeđivanja na temelju zakona nije jedan od tih učinaka. Treba naglasiti kako je de facto istospolna zajednica po mnogočemu vrlo slična de facto izvanbračnoj zajednici, no postoje i brojne razlike. Za ovaj rad najznačajnija razlika leži u činjenici da izvanbračni drugovi jedan drugoga mogu nasljeđivati na temelju zakona, dok istospolni to mogu jedino kao oporučni nasljednici. U ovom radu, dakle, bit će govora prvenstveno o nasljednopravnim učincima de facto zajednica – i izvanbračne i istospolne, odnosno nepostojanju istih. U radu je naglašena činjenica da je ovakvo razlikovanje glede učinaka koje navedene de facto zajednice imaju, odnosno, nemaju u nasljednom pravu, utemeljeno jedino na spolu osoba koje tvore odnosnu zajednicu, što predstavlja diskriminaciju istospolnih partnera. Također se naglašava kako ne postoji nikakav pravni razlog da se zakonsko nasljeđivanje istospolnih partnera nije dopustilo u postojećem zakonskom okviru na temelju manjih intervencija u Zakon o nasljeđivanju.
The proper coexistence of humans and other members of the living world is one of the essential preconditions for forming the rule of law. Through the influence of the biocentric concept, under the ...auspices of bioethical and animal-ethical thinking, the legal regulation of humans and animals develops within the framework of animal law as a relatively new branch of law. One of the central topics within the mentioned legal branch is the discussion of animals as objects of property (proprietary) rights and, potentially, as holders of certain legal rights. The above represents a significant challenge to property law and the theoretical foundations of civil law, given that the Croatian Ownership and Other Proprietary Rights Act does not explicitly mention the status of an animal, but the status of an animal as a thing derives from the Croatian property law doctrine. The paper analytically, historically and comparatively examines the current legal status of animals as objects of property rights. Historical insight refers to the development of the paradigmatic position of animals as things established in Roman private law. Analytical elaboration of current property law statutory provisions and reflection of property law doctrine are placed in the comparative legal context of the civil law provisions of those countries that have recognized animals as non-things or as sentient beings.
Wills are formal legal affairs that must satisfy strict prerequisites in order to be valid. Otherwise, they will be either automatically null or voidable. The rules pertaining to the form of wills ...have always been strict and have required wills to be made in a certain way. It is said that the amplified formalism promotes testamentary intent, ensures reliable evidence of testator’s wishes and reinforces the gravity of testation. However, it seems that, as of late, formalism sometimes clashes with the real intent of the decedent. Some countries have already adopted rules that allow judges to consider documents that do not meet all of the formal requirements needed for wills, to be valid and have effect. By doing so, they have opened the door to creation of certain new types of wills, made with the help of digital technology, that have never existed before – i.e. wills created with the help of smartphones, cameras or computers. Wills made with the help of digital technology are extremely informal but nonetheless; they purport testamentary intentions of the people who made them. These wills would not have any effect in most countries, however, in some, they can be declared valid, under certain conditions. This paper deals with a number of such examples and implications of abandoning strict formalism concerning the form of wills.
OPORUKE U 21. STOLJEĆU Klasiček, Dubravka
Pravni vjesnik,
07/2019, Letnik:
35, Številka:
2
Journal Article
Odprti dostop
Oporuke su formalni pravni poslovi koji moraju udovoljavati strogim pretpostavkama kako bi bili valjani. Ako ne udovoljavaju tim pretpostavkama, bit će nevaljane. Pravila koja se odnose na oblik ...oporuke uvijek su bila stroga i zahtijevala da one budu sastavljene na točno određeni način. Mnogi naglašavaju kako takav pojačani formalizam promiče pravu volju oporučitelja, osigurava pouzdane dokaze o njegovim željama i pojačava ozbiljnost oporučivanja. Međutim, čini se da se formalizam katkad sukobljava s namjerom ostavitelja. Neke države već su usvojile pravila koja sucima omogućuju da dopuste određenim dokumentima, koji ne zadovoljavaju sve propisane formalnosti potrebne za oporuku, da budu valjani i imaju pravni učinak. Time su se otvorila vrata stvaranju određenih novih vrsta oporuka koje su napravljene uz pomoć digitalne tehnologije, a koje nikada prije nisu postojale: npr. oporuke napravljene uz pomoć pametnih telefona, kamera ili računala. Sve ovakve oporuke izrazito su neformalne, no, istodobno, odra- žavaju pravu volju osoba koje su ih napravile. Uglavnom takve oporuke nemaju nikakvog učin- ka, međutim, u pojedinim državama mogu, pod određenim uvjetima, biti proglašene valjanim. Ovaj će se rad baviti nizom takvih slučajeva i implikacijama napuštanja strogog formalizma kod pravljenja oporuka.
PDF
