Search

Tiesību zinātne Tiesību zinātne Law Science Law Science ANOTĀCIJA Bakalaura darba tēma ir „Negodprātīga tiesību izmantošana civilprocesā”. Negodprātīga tiesību izmantošana ir viens no ietekmējošākajiem faktoriem, kas ietekmē efektīvu tiesas procesu. Kvalitatīvu, ātru un ekonomisku tiesas procesu nav iespējams nodrošināt un panākt, ja tiesas procesā, tiesvedībā ir personas, kuras neievēro citu tiesības, kā arī nerīkojās labticīgi. Darba autores mērķis ir aplūkot negodprātīgas procesuālo tiesību un pienākumu izmantošanas, kā arī pildīšanas praksi Latvijā, tostarp, salīdzinot ar citu valstu regulējumiem, noskaidrot, vai tiesas izmanto Civilprocesa likumā noteiktās sankcijas konstatējot negodprātīgu personu rīcību, kā mijiedarbojas negodprātīga personu rīcība ar efektīvu tiesas procesu, norādot uz tiesvedības skartajiem problēmjautājumiem un izvirzot Civilprocesa likuma grozījumus. Darbā konstatēts, ka tiesa nolēmumos bieži atzīst negodprātīgu lietas dalībnieka rīcību, bet par to sankcijas piemēro reti, vai nepiemēro nemaz. Lai mainītu, vai izskaustu negodprātīgu lietas dalībnieku rīcību, tiek piedāvāts un izvirzīts grozīt tiesai izvēlēties, proti, tiesību piemērot sankcijas grozīt uz pienākumu to darīt, kā obligātu prasību. Tostarp, grozīt lietu izskatīšanas kārtību lūguma par naudas soda atcelšanu vai samazināšanu uz rakstveida procesu, kā arī citi tiesību normu grozīšanas ieteikumi, lai tiesas process būtu kvalitatīvi efektīvs. Atslēgvārdi: negodprātīga tiesību un pienākumu izmantošana, sankcijas, labas ticības princips, efektīvs tiesas process, taisnīgums. ANNOTATION The topic of the bachelor is „Unscrupulous right usage at civil proceedings”. Unfair use of rights is one of the most influential factors influencing effective court proceedings. It is not possible to ensure and achieve a high quality, fast and economical trial if there are persons in the trial proceedings who do not respect the rights of others and don't act in good faith. The aim of the author is to look at the practice of unfair exercise of procedural rights and obligations, as well as filling practice in Latvia, including in comparing with the regulations of other countries, whether courts use sanctions specified in the Civil Procedure Law to detect dishonesty, pointing out the issues affected by the proceedings and proposing amendments to the Civil Procedure Law. The paper finds that the court often acknowledges the unfair conduct of the party, but sanctions are rarely or not applied at all. In order to change whether to eradicate the dishonest conduct of the parties, it is proposed and proposed to amend the choice of the court, namely to amend the right to impose sanctions to the obligation to do so as a mandatory requirement. To change or eliminate dishonest action of the participants, is offered and proposed to amend or reduction of the right to amend the obligation to impose sanctions as a mandatory requirement.Among other things, to change the procedure for hearing cases regarding the application for cancellation or reduction of a fine to a written procedure, as well as other recommendations for amending legal norms in order to make the court proceedings qualitatively efficient. Keywords: unfair exercise of rights and obligations, sanctions, good faith principle, efficient court proceedings, justice.

Tiesību zinātne Tiesību zinātne Law Science Law Science Darba autore darbā pētīja fiziskas personas atbrīvošanas no parādsaistībām maksātnespējas procesā tiesiskā regulējuma būtību. Latvijā fiziskās personas maksātnespējas procesa ietvaros, izpildot saistību dzēšanas plānu, personu var atbrīvot no atlikušajām nedzēstajām saistībām, ja tā ir bijusi godprātīga un savus pienākumus pildījusi labā ticībā. Darbā autore analizēja labticīguma kritērijus fiziskās personas atbrīvošanai no parādsaistībām maksātnespējas procesā. Pamatojoties uz Latvijas Republikas tiesas nolēmumiem, darba autore nonāca pie secinājumiem par labticības principa saturu fiziskās personas maksātnespējas procesā. Izpētot dažādus literatūras avotus darba autore konstatēja Maksātnespējas likuma piemērošanas problēmas un nobeigumā piedāvāja tiesiskā regulējuma grozījumus ar mērķi uzlabot fiziskās personas maksātnespējas procesa institūtu. Darba gaitā autore veica tiesu prakses analīzi, lai noskaidrot, kāda nozīme ir labticības principam fiziskas personas atbrīvošanā no parādsaistībām maksātnespējas procesā. The author was exploring the legal regulation of debt relief in the insolvency proceedings. In Latvia, within the framework of the insolvency proceedings of a natural person, a person may be released from the remaining outstanding obligations if person has acted in good faith and performed his or her duties in good faiths, the author analysed the criteria of good faith for the release of a natural person from debts in insolvency proceedings. Based on the rulings of the court of the Republic of Latvia, the author concluded on the content of the principle of good faith in the insolvency proceedings of a natural person. Researching various literature sources, the author identified the problems of application in the Insolvency Law and finally proposed amendments to the legal framework with the aim to improve the institute of insolvency proceedings of natural persons. In the course of the work, the author performed an analysis of court practice to find out the significance of the principle of good faith in releasing a natural person from insolvency proceedings.

En: Arbitraje: revista de arbitraje comercial y de inversiones. eISSN. 2603-9281. vol. 13, n. 2, 2021, pp 159-183 La prohibición del abuso de derecho es un principio importante del Derecho internacional. El concepto de abuso de proceso, que deriva de dicho principio, también ha sido reconocido por la Corte Internacional de Justicia y por otros tribunales internacionales, en particular los tribunales de inversiones. Este concepto se aplica a la iniciación abusiva de un proceso legal o de los incidentes procesales principales, como una solicitud de medidas provisionales. Existen todavía incertidumbres respecto a las razones por las que el ejercicio de un derecho o el comienzo de un procedimiento legal pueden ser abusivos. Sin perjuicio de ello, el abuso de proceso es un concepto necesario para proteger los valores fundamentales en los que se basa la integridad de la justicia internacional. The prohibition of abuse of rights is a key principle of international law. The concept of abuse of process, which derives from it, has also been recognised by the International Court of Justice and other international tribunals, in particular investment tribunals. This concept applies to the abusive initiation of legal proceedings or of the main incidental proceedings, such as provisional measures requests. Uncertainties remain as to what constitutes an abusive exercise of a right or initiation of legal proceedings. However, the abuse of process principle is essential to protecting the fundamental values that underpin the integrity of international justice.

The Good faith principle as stated in Article 1338 paragraph (3) of the Civil Code, has not been maximally implemented in BPR credit agreements, so it is important to review the transformation of good faith principle of the Civil Code in banking provisions, especially BPR in realizing sound credit. The research uses normative juridical legal methods. The results of the study show that the transformation of the principle of good faith stated in the Civil Code has not been explicitly stated in the provisions of banking law in Indonesia. The existence of principle of good faith explicitly only exists in Article 1338 Paragraph (3) of the Civil Code. Meanwhile, in the provisions of the Banking Law the existence of the principle of good faith is only implied by the principle of economic democracy by using the precautionary principle that is applied carefully and in good faith, as well as the principles of trust and confidence in good ability, ability, intention and morals from customers or the community in returning credit. The transformation of the principle of good faith should be clearly stated in the norm structure into the Banking Law and other related banking legal provisions. Abstrak G ood faith principle sebagaimana tercantum pada Pasal 1338 ayat (3) KUHPerdata, belum diimplementasikan secara maksimal dalam perjanjian kredit BPR, sehingga penting mengkaji transformasi asas itikad baik KUH Perdata dalam ketentuan perbankan khususnya BPR dalam mewujudkan perkreditan yang sehat. Metode penelitian menggunakan metode penelitian hukum yuridis normatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Transformasi asas itikad baik yang tercantum dalam KUHPerdata belum secara eksplisit ternormakan dalam ketentuan hukum perbankan di Indonesia. Keberadaan asas Itikad baik secara eksplisit hanya eksis dalam Pasal 1338 Ayat (3) KUHPerdata. Sementara itu, dalam ketentuan Undang-Undang Perbankan keberadaan asas itikad baik hanya tersirat dari asas demokrasi ekonomi dengan menggunakan prinsip kehati-hatian yang diterapkan secara hati-hati dan itikad baik, serta prinsip kepercayaan dan keyakinan akan kemampuan, kesanggupan, itikad serta akhlak yang baik dari nasabah atau masyarakat dalam mengembalikan kredit. Transformasi asas itikad baik sebaiknya dituangkan dalam struktur norma secara tegas ke dalam Undang-Undang Perbankan dan ketentuan hukum perbankan terkait lainnya.

Good faith is a principle prominent in civil law countries but less so in common law countries, and which allows courts to deviate from black letter law. It provides them with flexibility to change the outcome of a deductive legal decision if they regard it as absurd. The principle of good faith thus empowers the judiciary to deviate. It can be used for an indefinite number of cases and might lead to almost all conceivable legal consequences. For instance, the judge can invalidate the contract, change the price, suspend or change a clause in the contract, or grant injunctive relief, compensation of damages, the disgorgement of profits or a removal claim. We argue that if the principle of good faith is used to develop contract law into an instrument for redistributing wealth in favor of poor parties, this can destroy the concept of contract as a social mechanism for generating mutual gains for parties, which might lead to unwanted economic consequences in terms of efficiency losses. We argue that the principle of good faith must be carefully and reluctantly used to reconstruct the fully specified contract and that well-informed judges, who understand the factual environment of a contract well should ask how fair bur self-interested parties would have allocated the risk in a pre-contractual situation. If the courts restrict the application of the good faith principle to these functions, this provides elasticity that otherwise would not exist if courts would strictly use the rules laid down in black letter law. Moreover, it saves transactions costs and is therefore in line with economic reasoning. We look at the most important Turkish cases and find that the Turkish Supreme Court following Continental European doctrines of good faith actually uses this principle to curb opportunistic behavior of parties and not to achieve redistribution from the rich to the poor by way of interfering into contract law.

ABSTRACT: This article deals with the relationship between information duties and the good faith principle within the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR). After an introduction regarding the origin of the Common Frame of Reference (CFR) and its end, the author explains the meaning of the concurrence between the Principles of European Law (PEL) and the acquis communautaire. Both of these sources deal with precontractual duties although at a different level. Whereas the PEL set up a general duty to act in good faith during negotiations, on this point the acquis concentrates on duties of information with regard to the consumer. The opinion of the author is that the generalization of these duties, which has been operated by the DCFR, is a good result as well as the insertion of them in the more general good faith principle. If information is loyalty, it cannot but be a general duty, at least in European legislation, which shows to have gone ahead in comparison with many national legal systems in Europe. There are also situations in which information has become contents of the contract. As to the method of connecting the acquis with PEL, this article tries to demonstrate that the double inspiration of the DCFR could only be satisfied by at the same time giving room to the task of the acquis and to the necessity of coherence, which was the preoccupation of PECL and now of PEL. A clear example of this is the new meaning that the original rule on negotiations contrary to good faith, originally adopted by PECL and inherited by PEL, has acquired following the flowing together of the last ones and the acquis; now the violation of duties of information also makes a negotiation contrary to good faith.