|
Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 2021. Issue 2 (52) |
||||||||||
| Title: | THE CIVIL LAW PRINCIPLE OF COOPERATION IN THE CONTINENTAL LAW DOCTRINE: EXTENSION BEYOND CONTRACTUAL LEGAL RELATIONS |
|||||||||
| Authors: |
A. A. Fedoseev, Perm State University |
 |
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | |||||||
| ORCID: | 0000-0003-1301-827X | ResearcherID: | AAO-2672-2021 |
|||||||
| Articles of «Scopus» & «Web of Science»: | --- | |||||||||
| Requisites: | Fedoseev A. A. Grazhdansko-pravovoy printsip sotrudnichestva v doktrine kontinental'nogo prava: rasprostranenie za predely dogovornykh pravootnosheniy [The Civil Law Principle of Cooperation in the Continental Law Doctrine: Extension Beyond Contractual Legal Relations]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Juridicheskie nauki – Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences. 2021. Issue 52. Pp. 346–371. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2021-52-346-371 |
|||||||||
| DOI: | 10.17072/1995-4190-2021-52-346-371 | |||||||||
| Annotation: |
Introduction: the article analyzes the possibility of the civil law principle of cooperation being implemented in various types of relations under civil law. Traditionally, the cooperation principle is considered in both Russian and foreign literature as the principle of fulfillment of a contractual obligation or as a group of additional obligations imposed on the parties to the contract and arising from the good faith principle. A more detailed consideration of the idea if cooperation allows us to draw a conclusion about the feasibility of this principle in other types of relations under civil law. Purpose: to justify the possibility of the cooperation principle being implemented in civil law relations other than contractual relations, namely in property legal relations, pre-contractual legal relations, and obligations from causing harm (protective legal relations). Methods: general scientific dialectical method; special scientific methods such as the method of comparative law, the technical method, the legal-dogmatic method, the historical-legal method. Results: analysis of legal regulation of such relative legal relations as contractual, pre-contractual, and protective, as well as property legal relations as a form of absolute legal relations, has shown that the cooperation principle is successfully implemented in these types of legal relations. Therefore, it is possible to consider this principle to pertain to the branch of civil law as a whole. Conclusions: the cooperation principle performs two functions: first, based on this principle, it is possible to achieve the purpose of civil law relations in a more effective way; second, this principle serves as a mechanism to overcome unforeseen circumstances that prevent the purpose of legal relations from being achieved. These functions are carried out in all the types of legal relations considered: in contractual relations – when there arise obstacles to the performance of a contract not specified in the contractual provisions; in pre-contractual relations – when there arise obstacles to achieving the purpose of negotiations (i.e. conclusion of a civil law contract); in protective relations – when there is a risk of an increase in harm or a risk of inability to fully reimburse damage in a timely manner; in property relations – when there occurs an accidental loss of a thing by the rightsholder. |
|||||||||
| Keywords: | cooperation principle; good faith principle; promotion principle; duty to cooperate;Treu und Glauben; Bonne Foi; bona fides; pre-contractual legal relations |
|||||||||
 |
download the full-version article | |||||||||
| References: | 1. Bogdanov V. V. Preddogovornye pra-vo¬ot¬no¬sheniya v rossiyskom grazhdanskom prave: dis. ... kand. jurid. nauk [Pre-Сontractual Legal Relations in Russian Civil Law: Cand. jurid. sci. diss.]. Moscow, 2011. 155 p. (In Russ.). 2. Gaydaenko Sher N. I. Al'ternativnye mekhanizmy razresheniya sporov kak instrument formirovaniya blagopriyatnoy sredy dlya predprinimatel'skoy deyatel'nosti (opyt Rossii i zarubezhnykh stran): monografiya [Alternative Mechanisms of Dispute Resolution as a Tool for Creating a Favorable Environment for Entrepreneurial Activity (Experience of Russia and Foreign Countries): Monograph]. Moscow, 2016. 248 p. (In Russ.). 3. Gambarov Yu. S. Grazhdanskoe pravo. Obshhaya chast' [Civil Law. General Part]. Moscow, 2003. 816 p. (In Russ.). 4. Gnitsevich K. V. Preddogovornaya otvetstvennost' v grazhdanskom prave (culpa in contrahendo): avtoref. dis. ... kand. jurid. nauk [Pre-Сontractual Liability in Civil Law (culpa in contrahendo): Synopsis of Cand. jurid. sci. diss.]. Moscow, 2009. 26 p. (In Russ.). 5. Grazhdanskoe pravo: uchebnik: v 4 t. [Civil Law: Textbook: in 4 vols.]. Ed. by E. A. Sukhanov. 2nd ed., revised and expanded]. Moscow, 2019. Vol. III. 480 p. (In Russ.). 6. Zaem, kredit, faktoring, vklad i schet: postateynyy kommentariy k stat'yam 807 – 860.15 Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Loan, Credit, Factoring, Deposit and Account: Article-by-Article Commentary on Articles 807 – 860.15 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation]. V. V. Baybak, O. M. Ivanov, A. G. Karapetov et al.; ed. by A. G. Karapetov. Moscow, 2019. 916 p. (In Russ.). 7. Zashhita grazhdanskikh prav: izbrannye aspekty: sbornik statey [Protection of Civil Rights: Selected Aspects: Collection of Articles]. Yu. N. Alferova, Yu. V. Baygusheva, Yu. V. Vinichenko et al.; ed. by M. A. Rozhkova. Moscow, 2017. 432 p. (In Russ.). 8. Kruglikova E. V. Titul'noe obespechenie kak sposob obespecheniya ispolneniya obyazatel'stv [Title Security as a Method of Securing Obligations]. Voprosy rossiyskoy yustitsii – Issues of Russian Justice. 2019. Issue 3. Pp. 414–432. (In Russ.). 9. Kuznetsova O. A. Normy-printsipy rossiyskogo grazhdanskogo prava [Norms-Principles of Russian Civil Law]. Moscow, 2006. 269 p. (In Russ.). 10. Kucher A. N. Teoriya i praktika preddogovornogo etapa: yuridicheskiy aspekt [Theory and Practice of the Pre-Сontractual Stage: the Legal Aspect]. Moscow, 2005. 363 p. (In Russ.). 11. Morozov S. Yu. Sistema transportnykh organizatsionnykh dogovorov [System of Transport Organizational Contracts]. Moscow, 2011. 352 p. (In Russ.). 12. Nam K. V. Istoriya printsipa dobrosovestnosti (TREU UND GLAUBEN) do prinyatiya Germanskogo grazhdanskogo ulozheniya [History of the Good Faith Principle (TREU UND GLAUBEN) prior to the Adoption of the German Civil Code]. Lex Russica. 2018. Issue 5 (138). Pp. 97–108. DOI: 10.17803/1729-5920.2018.138.5.097-108. (In Russ.). 13. Nam K. V. Razvitie printsipa dobrosovestnosti (Treu und Glauben). Sovremennyy etap. Vnutrennyaya sistematika [Development of the Good Faith Principle (Treu und Glauben). Modern Stage. Internal Systematics]. Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii – Herald of Economic Justice. 2018. Issue 7. Pp. 83–114. (In Russ.). 14. Panchenko P. V. Printsip sodeystviya storon obyazatel'stva v rossiyskom grazhdanskom prave: dis. ... kand. jurid. nauk [The Principle of Cooperation of the Parties to an Obligation in Russian Civil Law: Cand. jurid. sci. diss.]. Moscow, 2018. 188 p. (In Russ.). 15. Pokrovskiy I. A. Osnovnye problemy grazhdanskogo prava [Main Problems of Civil Law]. Petrograd, 1917. 328 p. (In Russ.). 16. Raykher V. K. Absolyutnye i otnositel'nye prava. (K probleme deleniya khozyaystvennykh prav). V osobennosti primenitel'no k sovetskomu pravu [Absolute and Relative Rights. (On the Problem of Economic Rights Division). Particularly with Regard to Soviet Law]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava – Civil Law Review. 2007. Issue 2. Vol. 7. Pp. 144–204. (In Russ.). 17. Sorokina E. A. Printsip dobrosovestnosti (BONNE FOI) v dogovornom prave Frantsii [Good Faith Principle (BONNE FOI) in French Contract Law]. Yuridicheskie zapiski – Legal Notes. 2011. Issue 1. Pp. 114–123. (In Russ.). 18. Shpoltakov O. V. Pravovoe regulirovanie preddogovornykh otnosheniy v rossiyskom grazhdanskom prave: dis. ... kand. jurid. nauk [Legal Regulation of Pre-Contractual Relations in Russian Civil Law: Cand. jurid. sci. diss.]. Moscow, 2016. 179 p. (In Russ.). 19. Adar Y., Gelbard M. The Role of Remedies in the Relational Theory of Contract – A Preliminary Inquiry. European Review of Contract Law. 2011. Issue 7. (In Eng.). 20. Axelrod R., Hamilton W. D. The Evolution of Cooperation. Science, New Series. 1981. Vol. 211. Issue 4489. Pp. 1390–1396. (In Eng.). 21. Brandenburger A., Nalebuff B. Co-Opetition: 1. A Revolutionary Mindset That Combines Competition and Cooperation. 2. The Game Theory Strategy That's Changing the Game of Business. New York, 1996. 304 p. (In Eng.). 22. Brox H., Walker W.-D. Allgemeines Schuldrecht. 41st ed. 2017. § 7. Rn. 1. 494 p. (In Germ.). 23. Demogue R. Traité des Obligations en General. 1931. Vol. VI. 756 p. (In Fr.). 24. General Clauses and Standards in European Contract Law: Comparative Law, EC Law and Contract Law Codification. Ed. by S. Grundmann, D. Mazeaud. Kluwer Law International, 2006. 221 p. (In Fr.). 25. Giles N. J. Rethinking the Cooperation Clause in Standard Liability Insurance Contracts. University of Pennsylvania Law Review. January 2013. Vol. 161. Pp. 585–621. (In Eng.). 26. Gruneberg Ch. Palandt Kommentar zum BGB. 75th ed. 2016. § 242. Rn. 15–16. (In Germ.). 27. Huageng Xu. The Trust Mechanism in Private Law: Fiduciary Duty and Good Faith as Examples. Renmin Chinese Law Review: Selected Papers of The Jurist. 2019. Vol. 7. Pp. 1–19. (In Eng.). 28. Larenz K. Lehrbuch des Schuldrechts. Vol. 1: Allgemeiner Teil. Munich, 1987. 668 p. (In Germ.). 29. Mekki M. The General Principles of Contract Law in the 'Ordonnance' on the Reform of Contract Law. Louisiana Law Review. 2016. Vol. LXXVI. Pp. 1193–1211. (In Eng.). 30. Parikshit G., Debraj R. Cooperation in Community Interaction without Information Flows. The Review of Economic Studies. 1996. Vol. 63. Issue 3. Pp. 491–519. DOI: 10.2307/ 2297892. (In Eng.). 31. Pedamon C., Vassileva R. The Duty to Cooperate in English and French Contract Law. One Channel, Two Distinct Views. Journal of Comparative Law. 2019. Vol. XIV. Issue 1. Pp. 1–25. (In Eng.). 32. Principles, Definitions and Model Rules of European Private Law. Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR). Full edition. Munich: Sellier. European Law Publishers GmbH, 2009. Vol. I. 1604 p. (In Eng.). 33. Rothschild M. Bionomics: Economy as Ecosystem. New York: Henry Holt, 1992. 423 p. (In Eng.). 34. Schwartz A., Scott R. E. Precontractual Liability and Preliminary Agreements. Harward Law Review. 2007. Vol. 120. Issue 3. DOI: 10.7916/D8T440MF. (In Eng.). 35. Schwenzer I., Hachem P., Kee C. Global Sales and Contract Law. New York: Oxford University Press Inc., 2012. (In Eng.). 36. Strätz H.-W. Treu und Glauben. Vol. 1: Beiträge und Materialien zur Entwicklung von Treu und Glauben in deutschen Privatrechtsquellen vom 13. bis zur Mitte 17. Jahrhunderts. Paderborn: Schöningh, 1997. (In Germ.). 37. Vaheesan S. Privileging Consolidation and Proscribing Cooperation: The Perversity of Contemporary Anti Private Law. Journal of Law and Political Economy. 2020. Issue 1. Pp. 28–45. (In Eng.). 38. Wendt O. Lehrbuch der Pandekten. 1888. 922 p. (In Germ.). 39. Yildirim A. E. The Concept of Pre-Contractual Duties and a Comparison between the Draft Common Frame of Reference, English and Turkish Legal Systems. Ankara Avrupa Calismalari Dergisi. 2017. Issue 16(2). Pp. 171–198. DOI: 10.1501/Avraras_0000000257. (In Eng.). |
|||||||||
| Received: | 15.10.2020 | |||||||||
| Financing: |
Acknowledgments: The reported study was funded by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR), |
|||||||||
614068, Perm, street Bukireva, 15 (Faculty of Law), +7 (342) 2 396 275
vesturn@yandex.ru
ISSN 1995-4190 ISSN (eng.) 2618-8104
ISSN (online) 2658-7106
DOI 10.17072/1995-4190
The certificate on registration of mass media ПИ № ФС77-33087 from September, 5th, 2008
The certificate on reregistration of mass media ПИ № ФС77-53189 from Marth, 14th, 2013
The magazine is included in List ВАК and in the Russian index of scientific citing
The founder & Publisher: the State educational institution of the higher training
“The Perm State University”.
Publishing 4 times a year