Glosa do uchwały Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 25 lipca 2019 r ., III CZP 12/19

2022
journal article
article
dc.abstract.enThis paper concerns the limits of the exception of the nemo plus iuris principle established in the Polish succession rules (Art. 1028 of the Civil Code). In the commented case, the Supreme Court stated that the mere fact of being a potential heir disqualifies a person as a third party to the inheritance. Legal interpretation conducted by the Supreme Court resulted in an ineffective acquisition of an asset by the above-mentioned potential heir from an heir included in the deed of succession. In any event, the equity concept created by the Supreme Court seems to be inadequately narrowing the scope of third-parties. It seems, however, that the source of the problem in the discussed case is not a wrongly defined group of third-parties who could validly acquire assets from succession estate notwithstanding the nemo plus iuris principle, but rather the burden of proving the acquirer’s bad faith imposed on the rightful heir and the scope of legal protection expanded to gratuitous acts.pl
dc.affiliationSzkoła Doktorska Nauk Społecznychpl
dc.affiliationWydział Prawa i Administracjipl
dc.contributor.authorWalczak, Patryk - 243884 pl
dc.date.accession2023-07-03pl
dc.date.accessioned2023-07-03T09:57:55Z
dc.date.available2023-07-03T09:57:55Z
dc.date.issued2022pl
dc.date.openaccess0
dc.description.accesstimew momencie opublikowania
dc.description.additionalBibliogr. s. 105-106. Streszcz. ang. s. 106pl
dc.description.number4pl
dc.description.physical95-106pl
dc.description.points70pl
dc.description.publication1pl
dc.description.versionostateczna wersja wydawcy
dc.identifier.doi10.26106/178e-ey06pl
dc.identifier.issn1641-1609pl
dc.identifier.urihttps://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/handle/item/313431
dc.identifier.weblinkhttps://journals.law.uj.edu.pl/TPP/article/view/1103/651pl
dc.languagepolpl
dc.language.containerpolpl
dc.rightsDozwolony użytek utworów chronionych*
dc.rights.licenceInna otwarta licencja
dc.rights.urihttp://ruj.uj.edu.pl/4dspace/License/copyright/licencja_copyright.pdf*
dc.share.typeotwarte czasopismo
dc.subject.ennemo plus iurispl
dc.subject.enalleged heirpl
dc.subject.enactual heirpl
dc.subject.engratuitous legal actspl
dc.subject.enpostumuspl
dc.subtypeArticlepl
dc.titleGlosa do uchwały Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 25 lipca 2019 r ., III CZP 12/19pl
dc.title.alternativeA commentary on the Supreme Court resolution of 25 July 2019 (ref. no. III CZP 12/19)pl
dc.title.journalTransformacje Prawa Prywatnegopl
dc.typeJournalArticlepl
dspace.entity.typePublication
dc.abstract.enpl
This paper concerns the limits of the exception of the nemo plus iuris principle established in the Polish succession rules (Art. 1028 of the Civil Code). In the commented case, the Supreme Court stated that the mere fact of being a potential heir disqualifies a person as a third party to the inheritance. Legal interpretation conducted by the Supreme Court resulted in an ineffective acquisition of an asset by the above-mentioned potential heir from an heir included in the deed of succession. In any event, the equity concept created by the Supreme Court seems to be inadequately narrowing the scope of third-parties. It seems, however, that the source of the problem in the discussed case is not a wrongly defined group of third-parties who could validly acquire assets from succession estate notwithstanding the nemo plus iuris principle, but rather the burden of proving the acquirer’s bad faith imposed on the rightful heir and the scope of legal protection expanded to gratuitous acts.
dc.affiliationpl
Szkoła Doktorska Nauk Społecznych
dc.affiliationpl
Wydział Prawa i Administracji
dc.contributor.authorpl
Walczak, Patryk - 243884
dc.date.accessionpl
2023-07-03
dc.date.accessioned
2023-07-03T09:57:55Z
dc.date.available
2023-07-03T09:57:55Z
dc.date.issuedpl
2022
dc.date.openaccess
0
dc.description.accesstime
w momencie opublikowania
dc.description.additionalpl
Bibliogr. s. 105-106. Streszcz. ang. s. 106
dc.description.numberpl
4
dc.description.physicalpl
95-106
dc.description.pointspl
70
dc.description.publicationpl
1
dc.description.version
ostateczna wersja wydawcy
dc.identifier.doipl
10.26106/178e-ey06
dc.identifier.issnpl
1641-1609
dc.identifier.uri
https://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/handle/item/313431
dc.identifier.weblinkpl
https://journals.law.uj.edu.pl/TPP/article/view/1103/651
dc.languagepl
pol
dc.language.containerpl
pol
dc.rights*
Dozwolony użytek utworów chronionych
dc.rights.licence
Inna otwarta licencja
dc.rights.uri*
http://ruj.uj.edu.pl/4dspace/License/copyright/licencja_copyright.pdf
dc.share.type
otwarte czasopismo
dc.subject.enpl
nemo plus iuris
dc.subject.enpl
alleged heir
dc.subject.enpl
actual heir
dc.subject.enpl
gratuitous legal acts
dc.subject.enpl
postumus
dc.subtypepl
Article
dc.titlepl
Glosa do uchwały Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 25 lipca 2019 r ., III CZP 12/19
dc.title.alternativepl
A commentary on the Supreme Court resolution of 25 July 2019 (ref. no. III CZP 12/19)
dc.title.journalpl
Transformacje Prawa Prywatnego
dc.typepl
JournalArticle
dspace.entity.type
Publication
Affiliations

* The migration of download and view statistics prior to the date of April 8, 2024 is in progress.

Views
10
Views per month
Views per city
San Jose
2
Warsaw
2
Gdansk
1
Lappeenranta
1
Wroclaw
1
Downloads
walczak_glosa_do_uchwaly_sadu_najwyzszego_z_dnia_25_lipca_2019_r_2022.pdf
65