| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font
First page > Show document

Show document Help

Title:ANALIZA SODNIH ODLOČITEV O (NEPOŠTENIH) SPLOŠNIH POGOJIH POSLOVANJA
Authors:ID Podlesnik, Polona (Author)
ID Kranjc, Vesna (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
Files:.pdf MAG_Podlesnik_Polona_2017.pdf (809,78 KB)
MD5: 90F6A72807A80FAE6487B82F3FCFDFC8
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Master's thesis/paper
Typology:2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:Splošni pogoji poslovanja (pogodbe) stranko zavezujejo, če so ji bili znani ali bi ji morali biti znani, pogoj pa je, da so objavljeni na običajen način. V potrošniških pogodbah se pravni standard običajne objave presoja strožje, v primeru zavarovalne pogodbe pa je izpolnjen- splošni pogoji morajo biti zavarovancu izročeni. Splošni pogoji morajo biti v pogodbenem jeziku ali takem, ki ga nasprotna stranka razume, veljajo pa tudi v drugem jeziku, če jih je nasprotna stranka v medsebojni praksi vedno sprejemala. Objava na spletu bo zadoščala v primeru izrecne privolitve v splošne pogoje, v primeru domnevane privolitve pa bo objava na spletu zadoščala le izjemoma, če je bila pogodba sklenjena elektronsko. Kadar si splošni pogoji strank nasprotujejo, se uporabijo splošna pravila o sklenitvi pogodbe- veljajo tisti splošni pogoji, ki so bili del sprejete ponudbe. Enostranska sprememba splošnih pogojev vpliva na bodoča pogodbena razmerja, razen v kolikor ne obstaja drugačna volja strank. Za določila splošnih pogojev veljajo vsi ničnostni razlogi, kateri veljajo sicer, nična pa so tudi, kadar nasprotujejo namenu pogodbe ali dobrim poslovnim običajem. Določila v potrošniških pogodbah so nična tudi, kadar so nepoštena, medtem ko glede na OZ lahko sodišče nepravična ali pretirano stroga določila na zahtevo stranke zavrne. Določila so nepravična (nepoštena) ali pretirano stroga predvsem takrat, kadar izključujejo obveznost oziroma odgovornost stranke, ki je pripravila splošne pogoje (pri čemer so zelo pogosti primeri, kadar zavarovalnica izključitev opre na vzročno zvezo oziroma pogodbeno domnevo vzročne zveze med ravnanjem zavarovanca in nastalim zavarovalnim primerom), ali pa kadar nasprotni stranki nalagajo dodatne obveznosti. Presoja je odvisna od posamičnega primera, vsa nepravična ali pretirano stroga določila pa imajo skupno lastnost- stranki jemljejo oziroma omejujejo različne pravice, ki ji pripadajo iz pogodbe. Skupna lastnost vseh mednarodnih ali evropskih aktov, ki so obravnavani primerjalno z določili OZ- CISG, PICC, PECL, DCFR in Direktiva 93/13/EGS, je teženje k poenotenju pogodbenega prava in iskanju skupnih rešitev, kar zagotavlja večjo pravno varnost strank v mednarodnem prometu. Splošna ugotovitev glede primerjave določil OZ in določil (oziroma njihove razlage) zgoraj navedenih aktov bi bila, da slednji vprašanja splošnih pogojev, ki jih ureja tudi OZ, urejajo podobno, vendar pa nekateri urejajo tudi vprašanja, ki jih OZ ne naslavlja izrecno, kar je zagotovo posledica sledenja poslovni praksi.
Keywords:splošni pogoji poslovanja, dobri poslovni običaji, kavza, pravni standard, potrošniška pogodba, zavarovalna pogodba, delna ničnost.
Place of publishing:Maribor
Publisher:[P. Podlesnik]
Year of publishing:2017
PID:20.500.12556/DKUM-65827 New window
UDC:347.4/.5(043.3)
COBISS.SI-ID:5430827 New window
NUK URN:URN:SI:UM:DK:08D1R3HF
Publication date in DKUM:08.08.2017
Views:2179
Downloads:398
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
Categories:PF
:
Copy citation
  
Average score:(0 votes)
Your score:Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:Bookmark and Share



Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:CASE LAW ANALYSIS OF (UNFAIR) STANDARD TERMS OF THE CONTRACT
Abstract:Standard terms are binding for a party only, if the party knows about them or should know about them, under the condition that they were published in the usual manner (availability). In consumer contracts, the assessment of the legal standard of publication in the usual manner is stricter, as in insurance contracts the legal standard is prefilled and the Court can’t assess it- the standard terms must be handed over. Standard terms must be in the language of the contract or in a language that the other party actually understands. They also bind if they are in a language that is nor contractual nor understood by the party, but the party always excepted the terms in a usage established between the parties. Availability on a website will be sufficient in case, where the standard terms were expressly incorporated, when in case of a presumed incorporation the availability on a website will be sufficient only, if the contract was concluded electronically. When the standard terms of the parties are in a conflict (battle of forms), the general rules on concluding a contract apply- those standard terms, which were a part of an accepted offer, are incorporated. Unilateral modification of standard terms affects only the future contracts, except when there is a different agreement of the parties. All nullity reasons that may apply, apply also on standard terms, but the standard terms are also null when they oppose the actual purpose for which the contract was concluded or good business customs. The provisions in consumer contract are also null when they are unfair, when in accordance with OZ the unfair or overly strict provisions can be strike down by courts, if the party requires so. The provisions are unfair or overly strict especially when they exclude liability or obligations of the party which supplied the standard terms (it is especially common that the insurance company relies the exclusion on a casual link or a contractual presumption of a casual link between the actions of the insured person and insurance case), or when they burden the other party with extra obligations. The assessment of unfairness and strictness depends on each case alone, but all unfair and overly strict provision have a common feature- they take or limit the party’s rights from the contract. A common feature of all the international or european acts that were mentioned in comparison with the provision of OZ- CISG, PICC, PECL, DCFR and Directive 93/13/EEC, is their aim to unify the contractual law and to find common solutions, which gives party’s greater safety in international legal transactions. The general conclusion about the comparison between OZ provisions and the provisions (or their interpretation) of the mentioned acts would be, that the latter address the questions about standard terms, which are also addressed in OZ, similarly, but some of them also address the questions, which are not addressed in OZ specifically, which is certainly a consequence of the fact, that the acts follow commercial practice.
Keywords:standard contract terms, good business customs, causa, legal standard, consumer contract, insurance contract, partial nullity.


Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)
0 - 0 / 0
 
There are no comments!

Back
Logos of partners University of Maribor University of Ljubljana University of Primorska University of Nova Gorica