Zbornik, Vol. 39 No. 3, 2018.
Izvorni znanstveni članak
https://doi.org/10.30925/zpfsr.39.3.3
ANTICHRESIS IN ROMAN LEGAL DOCTRINE
Ines Matić
orcid.org/0000-0002-6101-8445
; Sveučilište u Rijeci Pravni fakultet, Rijeka, Hrvatska
Anamari Petranović
; Sveučilište u Rijeci Pravni fakultet, Rijeka, Hrvatska
Sažetak
The paper addresses the problem of definition and content of the antichresis institute approaching the fragments in Justinian’s Digest (Marcian’s D.13.7.33. and D.20.1.11.1; Paul’s D.20.2.8) since their fundamental reference as the only Roman legal sources that explicitly address this institute. The analysis of Marcian’s passages D.13.7.33. and D.20.1.11.1, along with relevant accents of legal doctrine, outlines
the key elements of antichresis and presents the theories referring legal nature of this institute, suggesting that antichresis and pactum antichreticum are not synonyms (as / has been/ usually presumed), but occur as two different legal institutes thus including essentially different functions, and consequently, different system of legal protection.
Segment of the paper focused on the analysis of Paul’s text D.20.2.8., introduces the basic features of tacit antichresis (antichresis tacita) correlated with the concept of consensual antichresis.
Ključne riječi
pactum antichreticum; antichresis; tacit antichresis; Roman law; innominate contracts; pledge
Hrčak ID:
216560
URI
Datum izdavanja:
28.12.2018.
Posjeta: 2.400 *