Везде
Assumption of the Default Debt by the Obligated Person
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
Assumption of the Default Debt by the Obligated Person
Annotation
PII
S1605-65900000622-5-1
DOI
10.61205/jrp.2023.114
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Vladislav Gruzdev 
ORCID: 0000-0002-4236-8140
Occupation: Professor at the Civil and Entrepreneurial Law
Affiliation: Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management
Address: Novosibirsk, Russia
Edition
Volume 27 No. 10
Pages
43-54
Abstract

The institution of debt assumption is traditionally used in domestic civil law to regulate property turnover, which attracts the close attention of representatives of civil science. At the same time, the debt assumption is qualified in different ways: as a unilateral transaction, a legal act, transactionlike actions.

Using formal-logical and historical research methods, the author proves that the assumption of the default debt is a unilateral transaction, for which it is necessary and sufficient to express the will of the obligated party. This transaction is made in favor of the opposite side of the legal relationship and entails legal consequences in the form of its change, namely, it modifies the violated subjective right in the direction of qualitative improvement: it prolongs the existence of powers capable of enforcement (in case of debt assumption during the limitation period) or returns such powers lost due to the expiration of the limitation period (in the case of debt assumption after the expiration of the statute of limitations). By assumption of the debt addressed to the authorized person, the person confirms the existence of his obligation to a certain extent, in connection with which it is logical to calculate the term for the enforcement of the violated right anew. The authorized person's awareness of the transaction in question is necessary, but not to establish the legal effect of the transaction, but in order to take advantage of its benefits.

The types of assumption of the default debt and the form of this transaction, acceptable evidence of its commission are considered. It is concluded that in the absence of admissible evidence, the debt assumption transaction is unfulfilled. Based on the results of the study, proposals for amendments and additions to Articles 203, 205, 206 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation were formulated.

Keywords
debt assumption, limitation period, suspension of the limitation period, restoration of the limitation period, undisclosed debt, suppressed debt
Date of publication
25.10.2023
Number of purchasers
10
Views
92
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf
1

References



Additional sources and materials

1. Agarkov M. M. The concept of a transaction under Soviet civil law. In: Agarkov M. M. Selected works on Civil law. Vol. 1. Moscow, 2012. Pp. 208—229. (In Russ. ) 
2. Alekseev S. S. General theory of law: textbook. Moscow, 2008. 576 p. (In Russ. ) 
3. Alekseev S. S. Unilateral transactions in the mechanism of legal regulation. Teoreticheskie problemy grazhdanskogo prava, 1970, no. 13. (In Russ. ) 
4. Bisultanov Ya. Kh. -M. Actions testifying to the recognition of debt under Article 203 of the Civil Code: theoretical construction and correlation with the recognition of debt under Article 206 of the Civil Code. Zakon, 2018, no. 2, pp. 175—191. (In Russ. ) 
5. Sergeev A. P. (ed. ). Civil Law: textbook. Vol. 1. Moscow, 2010. 800 p. (In Russ. ) 
6. Grishaev S. P., Bogacheva T. V., Svit Yu. P. Article-by-article commentary on the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Part one. Access from SPS “ConsultantPlus”, 2019. 
7. Zueva M. V., Makhina S. N., Nikulinskaya N. F., Pomogalova Yu. V., Tomtosov A. A. Comment to subsection 5 “Deadlines. Limitation period” of Section I of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (Part One) of November 30, 1994 No. 51-FZ (article-by-article). Access from SPS “ConsultantPlus”, 2016. 
8. Kondratenko E. O. Written recognition of debt as a basis for the renewal of the statute of limitations: difficulties in applying the novel paragraph 2 of Article 206 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii, 2018, no. 10, pp. 180—192. (In Russ. ) 
9. Krasavchikov O. A. Legal facts in Soviet civil law. Kategorii nauki grazhdanskogo prava. Moscow, 2005. Pp. 49—241. (In Russ. ) 
10. Kulakov V. V. Law of obligations: study guide. Moscow, 2016. 186 p. (In Russ. ) 
11. Musin V. A. Modernization of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Arbitrazhnye spory, 2016, no. 1. 
12. Pavlov A. A. Two questions about the statute of limitations: what the Supreme Court said and what it didn't say. Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii, 2016, no. 3, pp. 81—95. (In Russ. ) 
13. Ryasentsev V. A. Debt recognition as the basis for the interruption of the limitation period. Sotsialisticheskaya zakonnost', 1985, no. 12, pp. 35—38. (In Russ. ) 
14. Karapetov A. G. (ed. ). Transactions, representation, limitation period: article-by-article commentary to Articles 153—208 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Moscow, 2018. 1264 p. (In Russ. ) 
15. Sergeev A. P., Tereshchenko T. A. Limitation period: certain contradictions of legal regulation and related problems of law enforcement. Vestnik Arbitrazhnogo suda Moskovskogo okruga, 2017, no. 2, pp. 36—47. (In Russ. ) 
16. Sergeev A. P., Tereshchenko T. A. New judicial interpretation of the statute of limitations: commentary to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 29. 09. 2015 No. 43. Zakon, 2015, no. 11, pp. 87—95. (In Russ. ) 
17. Stepanov D. I., Mikhalchuk Yu. S. Director's liability to the corporation for damages caused to it in judicial practice. Moscow, 2018. 207 p. (In Russ. ) 
18. Erdelevskiy A. M. About the legal nature of the performance of the duty. Access from SPS “ConsultantPlus”, 2011. 
19. Erdelevskiy A. About the limitation period. Access from SPS “ConsultantPlus”, 2017.

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate