Mednarodna pristojnost v pogodbah o prodaji blaga in opravljanju storitev

Garmut, Marko

| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font

First page > Show document

Show document

Title:	Mednarodna pristojnost v pogodbah o prodaji blaga in opravljanju storitev
Authors:	ID Garmut, Marko (Author) ID Repas, Martina (Mentor) More about this mentor...
Files:	UN_Garmut_Marko_2018.pdf (955,64 KB) MD5: A6D486917B74B7BEE1AB7B240920B212 PID: 20.500.12556/dkum/9db7b6b0-7581-4652-8469-867565ecbcde
Language:	Slovenian
Work type:	Bachelor thesis/paper
Typology:	2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization:	PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:	Diplomska naloga preučuje mednarodno pristojnost v pogodbenih zadevah, še posebej pa se osredotoča na točko b) prvega odstavka 7. člena Uredbe 1215/2012, ki določa mednarodno pristojnost v pogodbah o prodaji blaga in opravljanju storitev. Glede na kompleksnost te specialne pristojnosti, je pomembna natančna opredelitev pojmov, saj je od pravilne določitve mednarodne pristojnosti lahko odvisna tudi rešitev konkretnega spora. Sodišče EU se je v postopkih predhodnega odločanja ukvarjalo s številnimi zadevami povezanimi z mednarodno pristojnostjo v pogodbenih zadevah, vendar še vedno obstajajo sporna vprašanja. V zvezi z zahtevkom za izročitev blaga sem ugotovil, da je izključena uporaba prvega odstavka 7. člena Uredbe 1215/2012. V pogodbah o prodaji blaga se kolizijska pravila ne morejo uporabiti, saj takšna rešitev ni v skladu s ciljem in sistemom omenjene uredbe. Mednarodna pristojnost v pogodbenih razmerjih predstavlja tudi izjemo od splošne pristojnosti in te je potrebno razlagati ozko, zato je bolje, da se za ta primer pristojnost utemelji na podlagi splošne pristojnosti, določene v 4. členu Uredbe 1215/2012 ali pa na podlagi tihe privolitve, določene v 26. členu omenjene uredbe. Prav tako Sodišče EU ni podalo odgovora na vprašanje, ali se lahko uporabijo pravila točke a) prvega odstavka 7. člena Uredbe 1215/2012, v primeru kraja dostave blaga v tretji državi, če se zahtevek glasi na plačilo kupnine, ki jo je treba plačati v državi članici EU. V tem primeru je pomembna točka c) prvega odstavka 7. člena Uredbe 1215/2012, po kateri se celotno razmerje presoja po točki a), ki določa mednarodno pristojnost glede na posamezni zahtevek in ne v skladu s krajem izpolnitve karakteristične obveznosti. Smisel te rešitve je, da se sploh lahko uporabi prvi odstavek 7. člena Uredbe 1215/2012, saj je podana tesna navezna okoliščina med krajem in plačilom kupnine. Tako bi zadevno sodišče učinkoviteje in bolj ekonomično odločalo o zadevi, ker bi odločalo v kraju predvidenega plačila kupnine. Potrebno je upoštevati tudi povezanost pogodb o prodaji blaga in pogodb o opravljanju storitev. Ta pravila imajo namreč isto zgodovino nastajanja, sledijo istemu cilju in imajo enak položaj v sistematiki Uredbe 1215/2012. Torej bodo rešitve uporabljene za eno vrsto pogodbe, enake tudi za drugo, razen kadar sama narava pogodb tega ne dopušča.
Keywords:	Uredba 1215/2012, mednarodna pristojnost, pogodbena razmerja, blago, storitve, kraj dostave blaga, kraj opravljanja storitev, Sodišče EU, sodna praksa.
Place of publishing:	Maribor
Publisher:	[M. Garmut]
Year of publishing:	2018
PID:	20.500.12556/DKUM-72392
UDC:	347.441.11(043.2)
COBISS.SI-ID:	5671211
NUK URN:	URN:SI:UM:DK:JZID81MT
Publication date in DKUM:	22.11.2018
Views:	1683
Downloads:	214
Metadata:
Categories:	PF
:	Copy citation

Average score:	(0 votes)
Your score:	Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:

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

Licences

License:	CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

Link:	http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Description:	The most restrictive Creative Commons license. This only allows people to download and share the work for no commercial gain and for no other purposes.
Licensing start date:	24.09.2018

Secondary language

Language:	English
Title:	International Jurisdiction in Contracts for the Sale of Goods and the Provision of Services
Abstract:	The thesis examines international jurisdiction in contractual matters and focuses in particular on Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 1215/2012, which defines international jurisdiction in contracts for the sale of goods and provision of services. Given the complexity of this special jurisdiction, precise definition of terms is important, since the correct determination of international jurisdiction may also affect the solution to a concrete dispute. The ECJ has been involved in a number of cases relating to international jurisdiction in contractual matters in preliminary rulings, but there are still issues at stake. Regarding the claim for the delivery of goods, I found that the application of the first paragraph of Article 7 of Regulation 1215/2012 was excluded. In contracts for the sale of goods, the conflict of laws rules cannot be applied, since such a solution is incompatible with the objective and system of that regulation. International jurisdiction in contractual relations is also an exception to general jurisdiction and needs to be interpreted strictly. It is better to justify it on the basis of the general jurisdiction laid down in Article 4 of Regulation 1215/2012 or on the basis of »tacit prorogation«, provided in Article 26 of the said Regulation. The ECJ also neglected to answer the question whether the rules of Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation 1215/2012 were applicable, in the case where the place of delivery of goods is in a non-EU country, if the claim is to be made on the purchase price which has to be paid in the EU member state. In this case, Article 7(1)(c) of the Regulation 1215/2012, according to which the entire relationship is assessed under item a), is important. The implication therefore is the Article 7(1) of Regulation 1215/2012 can be used as a connecting agent between the place and the payment of the purchase price is given. Thus, the court in question could deal with the case more effectively and more economically, since the deciding factor would be the place of the intended payment of the purchase price. It is also necessary to take into account the relationship between contracts for the sale of goods and those for the provision of services. These rules have the same origin, they were put in place to accomplish the same goal and have the same position in the system of Regulation 1215/2012. So the solutions will be applied to both types of contracts in the same manner, exemption being when the nature of the contracts itself does not allow it.
Keywords:	Regulation 1215/2012, international jurisdiction, contractual relations, goods, services, place of delivery of goods, place of provision of services, ECJ, case law.

Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)

0 - 0 / 0

There are no comments!

Back