Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

Ten serwis zostanie wyłączony 2025-02-11.

Nowa wersja platformy, zawierająca wyłącznie zasoby pełnotekstowe, jest już dostępna.
Przejdź na https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Ograniczanie wyników

2 Forum Prawnicze

2 Rafałowicz P.

Znaleziono wyników: 2

Liczba wyników na stronie

Wyniki wyszukiwania

Sortuj według:

Ogranicz wyniki do:

Glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższegoz dnia 10 sierpnia 2017 r., II CSK 844/16

100%

Rafałowicz P.

nr 5 (43)

92–101

The Supreme Court considered the nature of the obligation to remedy damage caused as a punitive measure before the change of succession law that took place on July 1, 2015 and whether this obligation passes on to the heirs of the obliged deceased. The Court stated that this obligation is of a compensatory nature, because it is derived from civil law. This obligation is not strictly con- nected with the deceased and therefore - is subject to succession. The obligation to remedy damage caused passes on to the minors and that this is not a cause for the application of article 5 of the Civil Code, which pertains to the abuse of subjective rights.

O naturze przebaczenia i skuteczności przebaczenia wydziedziczonemu

100%

Rafałowicz P.

nr 5 (55)

41–52

In the civil law doctrine, forgiveness is considered to be an emotional act or an act similar to a legal act (including a conventional act) which consists of forgetting the resentments for the harm suffered and the hurt felt. Meanwhile, forgiveness is a personal process, involving a person’s entire psyche, the purpose of which is to get rid of the forgiver’s desire to retaliate against the perpetrator. It is not a declaration of intent nor any other legal construct. Due to the ambiguity of Art. 1010 of the Civil Code there is a dispute as to whether forgiveness can have legal effects after a will – in which an offender has been disowned – has already been drawn up, and the instruction has not been revoked. In the Supreme Court’s view, forgiveness is effective in such a situation, while according to the vast majority of the doctrine, the opposite view is correct. The informal nature of forgiveness and its purpose – which is the act of “annulment of a civil penalty,” as well as the requirement of protecting family ties by the inheritance law – validate the aptness of the Supreme Court’s position.