Usaldusvastutus kui iseseisev vastutussüsteem ja selle avaldumisvormid
Kuupäev
2011-03-29
Autorid
Ajakirja pealkiri
Ajakirja ISSN
Köite pealkiri
Kirjastaja
Abstrakt
Klassikaliselt eristatakse tsiviilõigusliku vastutuse puhul vastutust lepingu rikkumise eest ja deliktiõiguslikku vastutust. Lepinguline vastutus eeldab pooltevahelise lepingu olemasolu, deliktiõiguslik vastutus tekib igaühe suhtes kehtivate üldiste kaitsekohustuste rikkumise tõttu. Lepinguline vastutus kaitseb eelkõige lepingupoolte huvi lepingu täitmise suhtes (positiivne huvi), deliktiõigus kaitseb isiku huvi selle vastu, et tema absoluutseid õigusi ei kahjustataks (negatiivne huvi).
Kuigi suur osa tsiviilõiguslikke vastutusjuhtumeid tugineb lepinguõiguse ja deliktiõiguse dihhotoomial, selgub lähemal uurimisel, et kõik tsiviilõiguses ettetulevad vastutusjuhtumid ei ole nende kahe vastutussüsteemi alla mahutatavad. Nii eksisteerib teatud hulk vastutusjuhtumeid, mis lahendatakse lepingulise vastutuse süsteemi raames hoolimata sellest, et pooled ei ole kehtivat lepingut sõlminud (e.g. culpa in contrahendo, näivusvolitus, asjatundja vastutus jne). Seejuures võib vastutus esineda kahel erineval viisil – isik peab kas täitma kohustused, mis tal oleksid lepingu kehtivuse korral tekkinud (täitmisvastutus) või vastutusena kahju eest, mis tekkis seetõttu, et teine lepingupool uskus lepingu kehtivusse (vastutus usalduskahju eest).
Selliste lepinguõiguse ja deliktiõiguse piiril asuvate vastutusjuhtumite uurimisega Eesti, Saksamaa, Šveitsi õiguses ning Euroopa tsiviilõiguse ühtlustamiskatsetes (DCFR, PECL, PICC etc.) dissertatsioon tegelebki, püstitades hüpoteesi, et sellised vastutusjuhtumid moodustavad iseseisva vastutussüsteemi – usaldusvastutuse süsteemi. Töös jõutakse järeldusele, et kuigi valdavalt on töö uurimisesemesse kuuluvad vastutusjuhtumid allutatavad usaldusvastutuse põhimõtetele, sõltub vajadus nn kolmanda tee järele tsiviilõigusliku vastutuse süsteemis eelkõige sellest, mis eeldused kehtestab konkreetne õigussüsteem selleks, et mingit nähtust käsitleda siduva tehinguna ning missuguseid tegusid käsitatakse konkreetses õigussüsteemis deliktiõiguse mõttes õigusvastaste tegudena.
In case of civil liability one can usually differentiate between liability for the breach of contract and liability based on tort. Liability that arises from contractual relationship predicates the existence of contract concluded between parties, liability based on tort can occur in cases when general obligations to protect are violated. Contractual liability protects primarily the interests of parties to a contract towards the fulfilment (positive interest), liability based on tort protects person’s right that his absolute rights are not violated (negative interest). Despite of the fact that majority of the civil liability cases are based on the dichotomy of contractual law and tort law, it is clear that not all of the civil liability cases can be classified under those two systems of liability. There exist certain number of cases of liability that are handled within the framework of the system of contractual liability despite of the fact that parties have not concluded a binding agreement (e.g. culpa in contrahendo, apparent authority, experts liability to a third person, etc). Such liability can occur in two different ways – person either has to fulfil obligations that he would have had in case of valid contract (liability to fulfil) or as a liability for damages arisen because other party believed into the existence of a valid contract (liability for the damages for reliance). This dissertation is concentrating on examining such borderline cases between contractual law and tort law on the basis of Estonian, German and Swiss legal systems. Also attempts to unify the European civil law systems (DCFR, PECL, PICC etc.) are taken into account. Basis of the dissertation is hypothesis that above described cases of liability form an independent system of liability – system of liability based on reliance. In the dissertation a conclusion is made that although cases of liability subject to the object of present study can be classified under the principles of the liability based on reliance, the necessity for such “third track” in the civil law liability system depends mainly of the conditions prescribed by concrete legal system for considering a deed as a binding transaction as well as which are the deeds that are considered as illegal according to the tort law.
In case of civil liability one can usually differentiate between liability for the breach of contract and liability based on tort. Liability that arises from contractual relationship predicates the existence of contract concluded between parties, liability based on tort can occur in cases when general obligations to protect are violated. Contractual liability protects primarily the interests of parties to a contract towards the fulfilment (positive interest), liability based on tort protects person’s right that his absolute rights are not violated (negative interest). Despite of the fact that majority of the civil liability cases are based on the dichotomy of contractual law and tort law, it is clear that not all of the civil liability cases can be classified under those two systems of liability. There exist certain number of cases of liability that are handled within the framework of the system of contractual liability despite of the fact that parties have not concluded a binding agreement (e.g. culpa in contrahendo, apparent authority, experts liability to a third person, etc). Such liability can occur in two different ways – person either has to fulfil obligations that he would have had in case of valid contract (liability to fulfil) or as a liability for damages arisen because other party believed into the existence of a valid contract (liability for the damages for reliance). This dissertation is concentrating on examining such borderline cases between contractual law and tort law on the basis of Estonian, German and Swiss legal systems. Also attempts to unify the European civil law systems (DCFR, PECL, PICC etc.) are taken into account. Basis of the dissertation is hypothesis that above described cases of liability form an independent system of liability – system of liability based on reliance. In the dissertation a conclusion is made that although cases of liability subject to the object of present study can be classified under the principles of the liability based on reliance, the necessity for such “third track” in the civil law liability system depends mainly of the conditions prescribed by concrete legal system for considering a deed as a binding transaction as well as which are the deeds that are considered as illegal according to the tort law.
Kirjeldus
Märksõnad
dissertatsioonid, õigusteadus, tsiviilõigus, lepinguõigus, vastutus