Search

This paper aims to analyze the legal nature of concessionaire and PPP contract in Albanian Legislation and through the perspective of European legislation analyzing mainly the Italian and French legislation and doctrine in this area. The main hypothesis that this paper aims to address is related to the fact, if it is enough to categorize these kinds of contracts with a hybrid status between public and private law, or the fact that so many countries appellate more and more to the concessionaire and PPP contracts is the momentum to create a separate law discipline as so many universities in France, USA, Japan do. Also, this paper aims to make a comparative study of Albanian legislation in the area of concessionaire and PPP contracts with the European legislation being the fact that for Albania this is a new area, and is a considerable lake of doctrine and legal studies that analyze the specifics and characteristics of such kind of contracts, putting at the last instance not only the Albanian contractual authorities but also the national courts in difficulties of implementation and interpretation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of the paper is to create a concept of what securing the claim is, based on the positive legislation of Kosovo's law, comparing its regulation with laws of somewhat similar legislations of neighbouring regions, understanding its implementation in practice, to achieve conclusions and remarks based on law, facts, practice, and the comparative aspect. The Civil Procedure Law in the Republic of Kosovo is regulated with contested, non-contested or enforcement procedure. Securing the claim is an institute expressively regulated by the "Law on Contested Procedure of the Republic of Kosovo" on its XXI Chapter that defines its means and types. Considering securing the claim measures are present in civil law to prevent any possible threat of protected rights until the final verdict is given, this paper tends to achieve a realization of how these measures practically succeed in actual cases, if they meet the criteria set in the law, or if securing the claim proposal is approved by the court, if they unintentionally restrain the respondent from using their rights. Moving forward, how one distinguishes claim security and interim measures from one-another although they describe the main concept, is strictly reviewed under this article, to finally achieve conclusions and remarks based on questions raised as above. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]