General characteristic of a civil-legal contract
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37772/2309-9275-2020-1(14)-1Abstract
Problem setting. The life of modern society is unthinkable without a civil-law contract, which is the most important tool for coordinating the will. With the help of a contract, the subjects of legal relations establish their own rights and obligations, specify and detail legal norms, fill in gaps in legislation and establish a legal link between them. This relationship becomes legally significant due to the fact that the state authorizes it through various measures of state influence, including measures of state coercion.
Target of research. The target of the research is to study the role of contracts in civil-law relations. Analysis of recent researches and publications. The following scientists were engaged in research of the specified question: D.I.Meyer, S.A.Muromtsev, V.M.Nechaev, I.A.Pokrovsky, I.N.Trepitsyn, G.F.Shershenevich, O.S.Ioffe, O.A.Krasavchikov, P.O.Khalfina, B.B.Cherepakhin and others.
Article’s main body. The concept of a contract as a complex multidimensional concept has existed since the time of Roman law. A contract is one of the oldest necessary legal structures in various legal systems of the world, which, according to most researchers, is based on an agreement between two or more entities. The universality of the agreement allows it to serve as an irreplaceable flexible tool for regulating relations at all stages of social development.
Conclusions and prospects for the development. Thus, we can conclude that in a market economy the contract is the main legal form of communication of participants in legal relations. Features of a civil law contract as the main areas of legal impact reflect the role and importance of the contract in streamlining the relations of participants in civil turnover, express the essence of a specific contract
References
Novitskiy I. B. (2002). Rimskoye pravo. Moskva: GEIS [in Russian].
Zhalinskiy A.. Rerikht A. (2001). Vvedeniye v nemetskoye pravo. Moskva: Spark [in Russian].
Osakve K. (2004). Ekonomiko-filosofskaya interpretatsiya dogovora v anglo-amerikanskom obshchem prave: liberalnaya teoriya dogovora. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava – Journal of Russian Law, No. 9, 9 [in Russian].
Beklenishcheva I. B. (2006). Grazhdansko-pravovoy dogovor: klascicheskaya traditsiya i sovremennyye tendentsii. Moskva: Statut [in Russian].
Kalabekov Sh.V. (2004). Dogovor kak universalnaya pravovaya konstruktsiya: Extended abstract of Candidates thesis. Moskva [in Russian].
Kniper R. (2012). Vlasnist, volodinnia ta yikh vidobrazhennia v dohovirnomu pravi. Pravo Ukrainy – Law of Ukraine, 9, 38 [in Ukrainian].
Oygenzikht V. A. (1983). Volya i voleiziavleniye (Ocherki teorii. filosofii i psikhologi prava). Dushanbe: Donish [in Russian].
Luts A. V. (2004). Svoboda dohovoru v tsyvilnomu pravi Ukrainy : navch. posib. Kyiv: Yurinkom Inter [in Ukrainian].
Bykov A. G. (1977). Osnovnyye funktsii khozyaystvennogo dogovora i ego rol narodnom khozyaystve. V. P. Gribanova. O. A. Krasavchikova (Ed.). Moskva: Yuridicheskaya literatura. [in Russian].
Verdnikov V. G. (1971). Funktsii dogovora. Trudy VyuZI – VUZI proceedings, Vol. 10. Moskva: RIO VyuZI [in Russian].
Semeusov V. A. (1976). Funktsii khozyaystvennogo dogovora. Irkutsk: Izd-vo Irkutsk.un-ta. [in Russian].
Krasavchikov O. A. (2001). Grazhdansko-pravovoy dogovor: ponyatiye. soderzhaniye i funktsii. Antologiya uralskoy tsivilistiki. Moskva: Statut. P. 166-182 [in Russian].
Khalfina R. O. (1975). Pravo i khozraschet. Moskva: Yurid. lit [in Russian].
