Verfügbarkeit: Prestanak SFRJ

Prestanak SFRJ: Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Format:	Buch
Sprache:	English
Veröffentlicht:	Beograd Pravni Fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu 1995
Schlagworte:	Geschichte 1991-1995 Jugoslavija - sukcesija države - družbena kriza - pravna država - Zvezna republika Jugoslavija Auflösung Staatensukzession Rechtsfolge Jugoslawien Föderative Republik Jugoslawien
Online-Zugang:	Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract
Beschreibung:	NT: Nestanak SFRJ. - Engl. Zsfassung u.d.T: The effects of dissolution of SFR Yugoslavia and of establishing of FR Yugoslavia on private law and social law relations
Beschreibung:	275 S.

Internformat

MARC


LEADER	00000nam a2200000 c 4500
001	BV022240071
003	DE-604
005	20111205
007	t
008	070124s1995 \|\|\|\| 00\|\|\| eng d
035			\|a (OCoLC)451010094
035			\|a (DE-599)BVBBV022240071
040			\|a DE-604 \|b ger \|e rakwb
041	0		\|a eng \|a srp
049			\|a DE-M382 \|a DE-12
080			\|a 341.2
084			\|a 7,41 \|2 ssgn
245	1	0	\|a Prestanak SFRJ \|b Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ \|c Vesna Rakić-Vodinelić ...
246	1	3	\|a Nestanak SFRJ
264		1	\|a Beograd \|b Pravni Fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu \|c 1995
300			\|a 275 S.
336			\|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|b n \|2 rdamedia
338			\|b nc \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a NT: Nestanak SFRJ. - Engl. Zsfassung u.d.T: The effects of dissolution of SFR Yugoslavia and of establishing of FR Yugoslavia on private law and social law relations
648		7	\|a Geschichte 1991-1995 \|2 gnd \|9 rswk-swf
650		4	\|a Jugoslavija - sukcesija države - družbena kriza - pravna država - Zvezna republika Jugoslavija
650	0	7	\|a Auflösung \|0 (DE-588)4193468-4 \|2 gnd \|9 rswk-swf
650	0	7	\|a Staatensukzession \|0 (DE-588)4056621-3 \|2 gnd \|9 rswk-swf
650	0	7	\|a Rechtsfolge \|0 (DE-588)4193464-7 \|2 gnd \|9 rswk-swf
651		7	\|a Jugoslawien \|0 (DE-588)4028966-7 \|2 gnd \|9 rswk-swf
651		7	\|a Föderative Republik Jugoslawien \|0 (DE-588)4339067-5 \|2 gnd \|9 rswk-swf
689	0	0	\|a Jugoslawien \|0 (DE-588)4028966-7 \|D g
689	0	1	\|a Auflösung \|0 (DE-588)4193468-4 \|D s
689	0	2	\|a Staatensukzession \|0 (DE-588)4056621-3 \|D s
689	0	3	\|a Rechtsfolge \|0 (DE-588)4193464-7 \|D s
689	0	4	\|a Föderative Republik Jugoslawien \|0 (DE-588)4339067-5 \|D g
689	0		\|5 DE-604
689	1	0	\|a Geschichte 1991-1995 \|A z
689	1		\|5 DE-604
700	1		\|a Rakić-Vodinelić, Vesna \|e Sonstige \|4 oth
856	4	2	\|m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 \|q application/pdf \|u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015451006&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA \|3 Inhaltsverzeichnis
856	4	2	\|m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 \|q application/pdf \|u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015451006&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA \|3 Abstract
940	1		\|n oe
999			\|a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015451006
942	1	1	\|c 909 \|e 22/bsb \|f 09049 \|g 496

Datensatz im Suchindex

_version_	1804136231643119616
adam_text	SADRŽAJ UVOD ................................................................... OPSTI DEO GLAVA PRVA PROMENA SUVERENITETA I SUKCESIJA DRŽAVA KAO INSTITUT MAĐUNARODNOG JAVNOG PRAVA .................................................. 9 I UČENJA О SUKCESIJI DRŽAVA ....................................................... 9 1. Teorijska shvatanja u XIX veku ..........................,...................................... 9 2. Teorijska shvatanja u XX veku .................................................................. 1 3 (a)Uopšte .................................................................................................. ІЗ (b) Definisanje pojma sukcesije država .................................................... 14 (c) Izvori prava ......................................................................................... 16 II PREGLED MEĐUNARODNOJAVNOPRAVNIH POSLEDICA SUKCESIJE ........................................................................ 17 GLAVA DRUGA UTICAJ PROMENA I SUKCESIJE DRŽAVA NA PRIVATNOPRAVNE ODNOSE I MIHOVU SUDSKU ZAŠTITU .............................................. 1 9 1. Sukcesija država sa stanovišta medjunarodnog privatnog prava ................. 19 2. Metodologija izbora merodavnog prava ...................................................... 21 3. Privatnopravne posledice sukcesije - opšta razmatranja .............................. 22 4. Pojedinačne posledice sukcesije .................................................................. 26 (a) Napomene .............................................................................................. 26 (b) Državljanstvo ......................................................................................... 26 (c) Uticaj sukcesije na međjunarodne ugovore ...........................................· 29 (d) Uticaj sukcesije na privatnopravne obaveze države ............................... 42 (e) Uticaj sukcesije na pravo svojine na nepokretnostima, nasleđivanje i bračne i porodične odnose ................................................................... 43 (f) Uticaj sukcesije na gradjanske sudske postupke ..........................,.......... 43 GLAVA TREĆA PROMENA SUVERENITETA I SUKCESIJA DRŽAVA KAO KREATORI NOVIH MEDJUNARODNOPRIVATNOPRAVNIH ODNOSA ................ 47 I DEFINISANJE PROBLEMA ................................................................... 47 1. Zadatak međunarodnog privatnog prava ...................................................... 47 2. Postjugoslovenski element ............................................................................ 50 II STANJE IZVORA MEĐUNARODNOG PRIVATNOG PRAVA U ZEMLJAMA NASTALIM NA EX-YU PROSTORU .............................. 51 A) Međunarodni izvori ..................................................................................... 52 B) Unutrašnji izvori .......................................................................................... 53 III REŠAVANJE PROBLEMA ................................................................... 55 1. Rešavanje intertemporalnog post ¡ugoslovenskog sukoba zakona ................ 55 (a) Problemi na nivou kolizionih zakona ..................................................... 55 (b) Problemi na nivou merodavnog materijalnog pravu .............................. 57 з 2. Rcšavanje teritorijalnog postjugoslovenskog sukoba zakona ..................... 59 (a)Uopšle .........................................................<......................................... 59 (b) Državljanstvo ........................................................................................ 60 (c) Prebivalište (domicil) ............................................................................ 67 (d) Boravište ............................................................................................... 74 IV RECIPROCITET .................................................................................. 75 V UTICAJ RASPADA EX-YU NA PROMENU PRIRODE PRAVNIH ODNOSA ..........................................................................:..... 78 POSEBNI DEO Deo prvi - UTICAJ SUKCESIJE DRŽAVA NA MATERIJALNOPRAVNE ODNOSE Glava prva -PRAVO SVOJINE NA NEPOKRETNOSTIMA I SUKCESIJA DRŽAVA ...................................................... 81 I GRANICE ZAHVATA DRŽAVE U PRAVO SVOJINE ....................... 82 1. Svojina kao ljudsko pravo ......................................................................... 82 2. Univerzalnost garantije svojine ................................................................. 83 3. Ustavna garantija, zakonsko uredjenje i ustavnosudska zaštita u SFR Jugoslaviji, u SR Jugoslaviji i u drugim novoobrazovanim državama na prostoru bivše SFRJ ............................................................ 83 4. Ustavna garantija svojine kao dvovrsna - garantija svojine kao ustanove (instituciona garantija)i garantija konkretnog prava svojine (individualna garantija) ........................................................... 84 5. Granuja svojine kao ustanove (instituciona garantija) .............................. 85 (a) Predmet garantije - stvarnopravni pojam svojine i širi pojam svojine 85. (b) Zagarantovana sadržina instituta svojine - bitni minimum pojma ..... 87 6. Ustavnosudska, redovna sudska i upravnosudska zaštita prava svojjne .. 90 II PRAVNI REŽIM SVOJINE NA NEPOKRETNOSTIMA U USLOVIMA SUKCESIJE ................................. ~ .................... ..:........... 91 l.Uticaj sukcesije država na režim prava svojine ........................................ 91 2. Garantije svojine u Ustavu SRJ i drugih država na području bivše SFRJ 92.. ■ (a) Instituciona garantija ........................................................................... 92 (b) Individualna garantija ........................................................................ 95 3. Povreda garantije svojine u propisima о prometu svojine na nepokretnostima 97 Ш UTICAJ SUKCESIJE NA STICANJE PRAVA SVOJINE NA NEPOKRETNOSTIMA, POSEBNO S OBZIROM NA PROMENU DRŽAVLJANSTVA STICAOCA ........................................................... 107 1. Stanje pre raspada ..................................................................................... : 107 2. Stanje posle raspada SFRJ i formiranja sukcesorskih država ................... 108 (a) Sticanje na osnovu pravnog posla ...................·.....................—........ 109 (b) Sticanje na osnovu modifikovanog pravnog posla ............................... 111 (c) Uticaj sukcesije na održaj prava svojine na nepokretnostima ......-....... 112 (d) Pravo gradjenja ................................................................................... 114 (e) Gradjenje na tudjem zemljištu ............................................................. 115 (f) Sticanje mortis causa ............................................................................ 115 3. Izbor merodavnog prava za slučaj da se nepokretnost nalazi na teritoriji više država nastalih na području bivše SFRJ ....................■............................ 116 4 Glava druga - DEJSTVO PROMENE SUVERENITETA NA OBLIGACIONE UGOVORE ................................................. 1 17 I ODREĐIVANJE PROBLEMA ................................................................... 117 II DA U SE UGOVOR UNUTRAŠNJEG PRAVA MOŽE PREOBRAZITI U UGOVOR SA STRANIM ELEMENTOM ............................................ 119 III PRAVO SFRJ KAO LEX CAUSAE ........................................................ 124 IV DA LI JE NOVODOŠLI STRANI ELEMENT PROMENJENA OKOLNOST - RAZLOG ZA RASKID UGOVORA ILI OSNOV ZA NJEGOVO PONIŠTENJE ...................................................................... 125 V ZAKLJUČAK .......................................................................................... 128 Glava treća - PORODIČNOPRAVNE POSLEDICE PROMENE DRŽAVNOPRAVNOG IDENTITTETA SFRJ ....................... 1 31 UVOD ......................................................................................................... 131 I RAZNOVRSNE POSLEDICE IZMENE DRŽAVNOPRAVNOG IDENTITETA SFRJ ................................................................................ 1 32 II NOVOPOSTAVLJENA PRAVNA PITANJA PO IZMENI PRAVNOG PORETKA SFRJ .................................................................. 133 1. Uticaj državnopravne transformacije na sticanje prava i obaveza iz Porodičnog prava .......................................................................................... 133 2. Uticaj državnopravne transformacije na sticanje prava i obaveza u Porodičnom pravu ......................................................................................... 1 34 (a) Uslovi zaključenja braka .......................................................................... 1 35 (b) Bračno-imovinski režim .......................................................................... 137 (c) Roditeljskopravni odnos .......................................................................... 139 (d) Usvojenje .................................................................................................. 141 (e) Starateljstvo .............................................................................................. 141 (f) Ostalo ........................................................................................................ 141 III ZAKLJUČAK .......................................................................................... 142 Glava četvrta - UTICAJ SUKCESIJE NA NASLEĐIVANJE ....................... 145 IUOPŠTE ..................................................................................................... 145 Π OSNOVNE PRETPOSTAVKE ZA NASLEĐIVANJE .............................. 146 1. Smrt ostavioca ................................................................................................ 147 1.1. Proglašenje nestalog lica za umrlog ........................................................ 147 1.2. Dokazivanje smrti ................................................................................... 148 І.ЗКотогуеті .............................................................................................. 149 2. Zaostavština ................................................................................................... 149 2.1. Nasledjivanje poljoprivrednog zemljišta ................................................ 150 III ZAKONSKO NASLEĐIVANJE ............................................................. 150 1. Pravo merodavno za zakonsko nasleđivanje ................................................. 150 1.1. Uticaj sastava zaostavštine na odredjivanje merodavnog prava ............. 153 2. Punovažnost osnova pozivanja na nasleđe .................................................... 154 3. Sposobnost nasleđivanja ..........................;..................................................... 155 4. Dostojnost za nasleđivanje ............................................................................. 156 5. Država kao následník ..................................................................................... 158 IV TESTAMENTALNO NASLEĐIVANJE ................................................. 159 1. Pravo merodavno za nasleđivanje testamentalnih následníka ....................... 159 2. Punovažnost testamenta ................................................................................. 161 2.1. Testamentalna sposobnost ostavioca ...................................................... 161 2.2. Punovažnost testamenta u pogledu forme ............................................... 162 2.2.1. Punovažnost vojničkog testamenta ...................................................... 163 2.2.2. Punovažnost usmenog testamenta ......................................................... 164 2.3. Mogući sukob zakona forme i zakona nasleđivanja ................................ 164 2.4. Punovažnost testamenta u pogledu sadržine ............................................ 165 2.4.1. Pravno lice kao testamentami následník............................................... 165 V NASLEDNOPRAVNA DEJSTVA POJEDINIH UGOVORA .................. 166 VI NÁSLEDNÍČKA IZJAVA ...................................................................... 167 Deo drugi - UTICAJ SUKCESIJE DRŽAVA NA GRAĐANSKE SUDSKE POSTUPKE Glava prva - UVODNA RAZMATRANJA .................................................. 170 I PREOBRAŽAVANJE DOMAĆIH SUDOVA U STRANE SUDOVE ....... 170 II PREOBRAŽAVANJE UNUTRAŠNJIH SUDSKIH POSTUPAKA U POSTUPKE SA STRANIM ELEMENTOM ............................................ 170 1. Promena državljanstva stranaka .................................................................... 170 2. Promena prebivališta stranaka ....................................................................... 171 III UTICAJ SUKCESIJE NA PROCESNOPRAVNE UGOVORE ............... 171 Glava druga - PROCESNOPRAVNE POSLEDICE PREOBRAŽA VANJA DOMAĆIH SUDOVA U STRANE SUDOVE .............................................. 171 I PRAVNE POSLEDICE VEĆ ZASNOVANIH SUDSKIH POSTUPAKA .. 171 1. Pravne posledice podnošenja tužbe sudu ....................................................... 171 2. Pravne posledice dostavljanja tužbe tuženom ................................................ 174 II UTICAJ SUKCESIJE NA VIŠESTRUKU LITISPENDENCIJU .............. 175 1. Preobražavanje domaćih litispendencija u Htispendenciju pred stranim i pred domaćim sudom ...................................................................................... 175 2. Učenja o (Orelevanciji parnice pred stranim sudom ...................................... 175 3. Vreme otpočinjanja toka parnice ..........................................................-........ 177 4. Ocena identiteta predmeta spora ................................................................... 177 5. Uzajamnost .................................................................................................... 178 6. Ranije řešeno pitanje dvostruke litispendencije ..............................-.............. 178 Ш IZVOĐENJE DOKAZA U INOSTRANSTVU ........................................ 179 1. Opšti uslovi za izvodjenju dokaza ............................................................*..... 179 2. Dokazivanje koje je izveo domaci sud pre nego što se preobrazio u strani ... 180 3. Legalizacija isprava ........................................................................................ 180 IV DEJSTVA PRAVOSNAŽNOSTI ........................................................... 182 1. Slučaj u kome je presuda postala pravosnažna pre sukcesije .......:................. 182 2. Slučaj u kome je presuda donesena ali nije postala pravosnažna ................... 184 Glava treća - PROCESNOPRAVNE POSLEDICE PREOBRAŽAVAN JA UNUTRAŠNJIH SUDSKIH POSTUPAKA U POSTUPKE SA STRANIM ELEMENTOM .............................................................................................. 185 I ISKLJUČIVA NADLEŽNOST SUDA SRJ ................................................ 185 1. Pitanje zakonodavne kompetencije za uredjivanje isključive nadležnosti ..... 185 2. Uticaj sukcesije na aktuelno tumačenje pravila о isključivoj nadležnosti suda SRJ ............................................................................................................. 186 3. Lista sporova i pravnih stvari za koje važe pravila о isključivoj nadležnosti suda SRJ ......................................................................................... 188 (a) Isključiva nadležnost u parničnom postupku ........................................... 188 (b) Isključiva nadležnost u vanparničnom postupku ..................................... 189 (c) Isključiva vansudska nadležnost .............................................................. 189 6 II SVOJSTVA STRANAKA I NJIHOVO ZASTUPANJE ........................... 189 1. Stranačka sposobnost .................................................................................... 189 (a) Fizičko lice ............................................................................................... 189 (b) Pravno lice ............................................................................................... 19 1 (c) lus standi in iudicio .................................................................................. 191 2. Parnična sposobnost ...................................................................................... 194 (a) Fizičko lice ................................................................................................ 194 (b) Pravno lice i oni koji imaju ius standi in iudicio ....................................... 194 3. Zastupanje stranaka ....................................................................................... 194 (a) Zakonski zastupnik ....................... ........................................................... 194 (b) Punomoćnik ............................................................................................ 198 III PROCESNI POLOŽAJ STRANAKA - STRANIH DRŽAVLJANA ....... 199 1. Procesnopravni položaj tužioca ..................................................................... 199 (a) pravo pristupa sudu .................................................................................. 199 (b) Aktorska kaucija ...................................................................................... 200 2. Procesnopravni položaj tuženog .................................................................... 202 3. Poštovanje načela kontradiktornosti u građanskim sudskim postupcima sa postjugoslovenskim elementom ......................................................................... 204 (a) Bavljenje (nalaženje) stranke i njenog zakonskog zastupnika u inostranstvu ............................................................................................. 204 (b) Dostavljanje stranom državljaninu u inostranstvu ................................... 205 (c) Dostavljanje domaćem državljaninu u inostranstvu ................................ 207 (d) Odnos između pravila о unutrašnjem dostavljanju i dostavljanju u inostranstvu .................................................................... 208 (e) Promena adrese u toku parnice ................................................................ 209 Glava četvrta - UTICAJ SUKCESIJE NA UGOVORE SA PROCESNOPRAVNIM DEJSTVOM ........................................................... 210 IUOPŠTE ..................................................................................................... 210 II ARBITRÁŽNI I PROROGACIONI SPORAZUM ..................................... 210 1. Uticaj sukcesije na arbitrážni sporazum i na arbitražno suđenje .................... 210 (a) Sukcesija pre otpočinjanja arbitražnog postupka ...................................... 210 (b) Sukcesija u toku arbitražnog postupka ..................................................... 211 (c) sukcesija posle donošenja arbitrážne odluke ............................................ 213 2. Uticaj sukcesije na prorogaciju nadležnosti ................................................... 213 (a) Izričiti prorogacioni sporazum .................................................................. 213 (b) Prećutna prorogacija ................................................................................ 214 III SUDSKO PORAVNANJE ....................................................................... 216 l.Uopšte ............................................................................................................ 216 2. Sredstva za pobijanje sudskog poravnanja ..................................................... 216 3. Razlozi za pobijanje sudskog poravnanja ....................................................... 217 4. Uspešno pobijeno sudsko poravnanje ............................................................. 217 Glava peta - PRIZNANJE I IZVRŠENJE STRANIH - POSTJUGOSLOVENSKIH - ODLUKA ........................................................ 219 I POJAM STRANIH - POSJUGOSLOVENSKIH SUDSKIH ODLUKA ....... 219 1. Koje su sudske odluke podobne za priznanje u SRJ ........................................ 219 2. Pojam strane (posjugoslovenske) sudske odluke ............ .................. 221 II POJAM POSTJUGOSLOVENSKIH ARBITRAŽNIH ODLUKA .............. 223 1. Unutrašnji (interni) izvori arbitražnog prava ................................................... 223 2. Međunarodni izvori arbitražnog prava ............................................................ 226 III PRIZNANJE POSTJUGOSLOVENSKIH ODLUKA - POJAM, POSTUPAK I USLOVI ............................................................... 227 1. Pojam priznanja postjugoslovenskih odluka ............................................... 227 2. Postupak priznanja posjugoslovenskih odluka ............................................ 228 3. Uslovi (pretpostavke) priznanja postjugoslovenskih odluka ....................... 230 3.1. Uslovi priznanja postjugoslovenskih sudskih odluka ........................... 231 3.2. Uslovi priznanja postjugoslovensjih arbitražnih odluka ....................... 235 Glava šesta - POBIJANJE POSTJUGOSLOVENSKIH ARBITRAŽNIH ODLUKA ........................................................................ 236 1. Vrste pravnih sredstava za pobijanje arbitražnih posjugoslovenskih odluka 236 2. Čija se arbitrážna odluka može poništiti pred domaćim sudom ................... 237 3. Da li svaka arbitrážna odluka mora imati svoju državnu pripadnost ............ 239 Deo treci - UTICAJ SUKCESIJE DRŽAVA NA SOCIJALNOPRAVNE ODNOSE Glava prva - OČUVANJE PRAVA NA PENZIJU U OKOLNOSTIMA POSLE TERITORIJALNIH PROMENA NA JUGOSLOVENSKOM PROSTORU... ............................................................................................. 243 I. POSTAVLJANJE PROBLEMA .............................................................. 243 II. KARAKTER I MEĐUNARODNO REGULISANJE PRAVA NA PENZIJU .......................................................................... 244 III. REGULISANJE PRAVA NA PENZIJU, STICANJE, OSTVARIVANJE I ISPLATA PENZIJE U SFRJ ................................ 250 IV. PRAVO NA PENZIJU KAO STEČENO PRAVO .............................. 253 V. DA LI SU DRŽAVE NA BIVŠEM JUGOSLOVENSKOM PROSTORU DUŽNE DA OČUVAJU STEČENO PRAVO NA PENZIJU ............... 254 VI. MOGUĆI PREDLOŽI ZA REŠAVANJE PITANJA U VEZI SA OČUVANJEM PRAVA NA PENZIJU ...................................................... 255 . ZAKLJUČCI ..................................................................................... 258 SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 259 STVARNI REGISTAR ............................................................................. 269 259 THE EFFECTS OF DISSOLUTION OF SFR YUGOSLAVIA AND OF ESTABLISHING OF FR YUGOSLAVIA ON PRIVATE LAW AND SOCIAL LAW RELATIONS SUMMARY This study has been made as an answer to the need to solve a number of legal issues brought about by the collapse of the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) and the establishing of new states in the territory of former Yugoslavia. Most practical problems, within the private law area, have arisen concerning the right of real property, contracts, inheritance, matrimonial and family relationships, pensions and legal procedure related to these matters. A number of theoretical questions figuring between public international law and private international law had to be dealt with first. A basic problem arising when an international subject ceases to exist, is the formulation of criteria for the transfer of private relationships, laid down in the legal order of the predecessor state, into the legal order of successor states. After analysing 19th century theories, it has been concluded that all those points of view could be broadly presented in two fundamental theses: (a) - succession pf states should conform with the succession as provided for in private law, so that in principle, all private law relationships, laid down in the preceding legal order, automatically pass into the new legal order; (b) - the extinction of an international subject implies the extinction of its legal order, and the successor state freely formulates its new legal order, due to which private law relationships, laid down under the preceding sovereignity, do not pass into the legal order of the new state. It was acknowledged at that time already that these two criteria had never been applied exclusively. That is why it is of suprime importance to find out criteria for defining those private rights that automatically pass into the new legal order, i.e., survive the extinction of the predecessor state. It is this issue that has been widely discussed in modern literature. The basic criterion for deciding which legal relatinships laid down in the former regíate shall be transfered into the new legal order, has been found in the acquired rights doctrine. The authors of the present study have concluded that this doctrine, in its original form, is not sufficiently accurate as to be applied to the Yugoslav case. They have thus searched for a more reliable criterion and concluded that the acquired rights doctrine should be modified in the following way: - acquired rights imply those private rights directly based on human rights, set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Internştional Convenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Convenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; - the content of these rights is set out in high-ranking written sources of international law and therefore there can be no doubt about their content and scope, unlike the classic acquired rights doctrine; ,- the classic doctrine of acquired rights was not in effect as a legal institute (not even in indication) in the legal order of former Yugoslavia, nor is today, so that its application could and cat» be denied, unlike human rights concerned, as both Convenants have been signed and ratified and now remained binding on ail the legal orders of the newly formed states. , practical legał effets of such modified doctrine of acquired rights result, m the case of Yugostatvia, in prec^ely formulated rules: (a) - the validity of a legal relationship is 260 governed by the legal oreder of the predecessor state; (b) - a legal relationship valid in the legal order of the predecessor state and constituting acquired right in the mentioned sense, is transferred automatically and unchanged into the legal order of the successor state; (c) - the legal order of successor state may not tuch by any of its acts on such acquired rights; (d) - ifit acts contrary to this, successor state is obliged to pay compensation. Apart from settling this essential issue, discussions have been also centered on the inter-temporal conflict of laws (the relationship between the predecessor state s private international law and that of the successor state), the transfer of international agreements concluded by the predecessor state into the legal order of the successor state, succession in matters of nationality, the problem of defining domicile in the new legal circumstances and, finally, the existence of reciprocity in the Yugoslav case. Inter-Temporal Conflict of Laws. This conflict of laws arises as a conflict between rules concerning substantive, procedural and collision laws, in relation to the substantive law regulations, the view has been taken that transitory regulations of the successor state should be complied with and if they cannot provide an answer, general succession rules of the given state shall be applied. As to the legal procedure rules, the very content of a number of acts of SFRY, by virtue of which the predecessor state s legislation was taken over, the inter-temporal rule that procedural regulations should be applied with immediate effect, has been questioned. It has been thus concluded that they should be applied solely to those civil proceedings instituted following the succession, with exceptions analysed in a particular chapter of this study. The inter-temporal conflict of collision regulations should be settled in accordance with transitory regulations of the state to which the court or other competent organ belong. The fact that regulations previously in effect appear as foreign in the successor state does not affect the already taken position. International Agreements. The view set out in the Vienna Convention of 1978 on succession of states in respect of treaties has been accepted here. Although the Convention has not been put into effect yet (we would like to point out that it has been ratified by SFRY), its principles mostly represent codified international customs. This position remain unquestioned in literature of a majority of newly emerged states following the breakup of Yugoslavia. Nationality. Prior to dismembrement of SFRY, legislative competence was devided between the federation and its constituent members (republics) in matters of nationality. Federal nationality was defined by federal sources of law, and that of republics, by their own sources of law. Even before breakup, it became disputable which of the two nationalities was original: whether the Yugoslav nationality was to be acquired following the acquisition of republican nationality or vice versa. The dissolution of SFRY made this already compex legal situation even more complicated. All the questions analysed so far can be reduced to three essential ones: (a) Whether the nationality of the successor state is acquired automatically, upon the establishing of its sovereignity? (b) Which subjects automatically acquire the nationality of the successor state, and which of them acquire the nationality under a constitutive act of the successor state? (c) When and according to what criteria does the nationality of SFRY, as a predecessor state, cease to exist? (a) The acquiring of the successor state s nationality is governed exclusively by its law. In the post-Yugoslave comparative law there have appeared varied solutions, but all these legal orders provide for such categories of persons that automatically acquire the new nationality. (b) In most cases, former citizens (nationals) of the republic m whose therritory die successor state has been established, automatically acquire the nationality of the successor state. On the other hand, the acquiring of nationality on the ground of a 261 constitutive act issued by authorities, is provided for those persons who have territorial links with the newly formed state and have already the SFRY nationality, irrespective of their former republican nationality. (c) The loss of the nationality of the predecessor state (SFRY) is governed by SFRY law. Having in mind the fact that the Federal Rebublic of Yugoslavia (FRY) claims continuity with the predecessor state, there arises a question whether all the persons who have not acquired nationality of any of the newly established states became citizens (nationals) of FRY ex lege. The answer to this question depends on whether there is continuity between SFRY and FRY or not. Arguments concerning both positions and their effects have been analysed and presented in this study. Domicile. This legal issue has an important role in view of defining international competence and the enjoyment of a number of private rights. The starting point is that all persons, irrespective of their nationality, domiciled in the territory of the newly emerged states, have retained their domicile. Reciprocity. Reciprocity in relations with post-Yugoslav foreign element, due to reasons we do not need to explain, appears mostly as a political phenomenon. From legal point of view, it has been concluded that it would be desirable to make a first step in the fields of reciprocity so as to establich a reciprocity de facto and thus enable legal traffic, as there now exist no possibilities of establishing diplomatic reciprocity between majority of the newly formed states. In the Particular Part of this study, the principles formulated in the General Part have been applied to the areas of law set out hereafter. 1. Real Property (Immovable). The most important source of law in this area in SFRY was the Federal Law of Property Relationships (LPR). All the newly formed states have taken over this source and have been applying it, with certain modifications, as their own national law. A fundamental issue arising here was that relating to the application of a modified acquired rights doctrine. It has been concluded that all the new constitutions, including that of FRY, provide for institutional and individual garantees of the right to own property, which should undoubtedly ensure respect for the right of ownership of immovables acquired in the previous légal order, irrespective of present nationality and domicile of the titular. However, this principle has been essentially derogated in legislative practice of certain states formed in the territory of former Yugoslavia (Croatia and Serbia) in such way that titulars, now foreigners, have been deprived of the right to dispose of their property until the settlement of Yugoslav crisis. However, these acts do not provide for compensation to the titulars. Apart from this, one of these legislative acts contains such a ban only for citizens (nationals) of some of newly formed states. It should be also pointed out that a number of owners, due to the present regime of crossing the new state borders, have been practically prevented from access to their immovables, which also derogates their right to enjoy them. All these acts are seen in this study as not only contrary to the modified acquired rights doctrine, but stricto sensu, in collision with the constitutions of the newly formed states. Therefore, all the affected owners have become entitled to compensation from the state in the territory of which the immovables are sited. The effect of the state succession on the acquisition of ownership of immovables, which has not been completed, has been particularly analysed here. Cases appearing most often in practice are the following: (a) - a legal ground was completed under the regime of the predecessor state, the succession was carried out, but the estate was not registered (modus acquirendi was npt obtained); (b) - adverse possession began under the legal order of the predecessor state and has come to an end under the legal order of the successor state; 262 (с) a permission for biulding had been validly obtained prior to the succession, while the construction was completed following the succession. Apart from deciding the applicable law for assessing the legal ground (Justus titulus) and the modes of acquisition (modus acquirendii. which has been no particular problem in Yugoslav case ( the lex rei sitae principle is still applied and the fundamental sources of law have retained the same content so far), there has emerged a particularly difficult issue to be solved: whether an intended owner, who has become a foreigner before he fulfilled the modes of acquisition (modus acquirendi ) requirements, shall acquire his property rights on the same conditions as domestic citizens (nationals), or on those provided for foreigners, under the law governing such relationships. Naimly, if one acquires the right according to the principle of international treatment, the regimes of all the newly formed states are the same and extremely restrictive. We wish to point out that this brings about the issue of reciprocity and of the first step to that effect. 2. Contracts. Two basic points of this issue have been discussed here: (a) - whether a contract concluded in former Yugoslavia (SFRY) has been transfered from national into international private law legal regime, following the breakup of the state and due to that fact that the parties to the contract have become of different nationalities; (b) - whether such a contract may be modified or annulled and on what grounds. (a) The answer to the first question is indisputable: such an agreement is subject to the private international law regime. (b) In order to answer the second question, it is first necessary to decide which is applicable law of the contract so as to assess the existence and terms for exercising the right to break, modify or annual the contract. As all the newly formed states have taken over the Federal Law on International Conflict of Laws (LICL), the criteria for deciding on which system governs the contract have remained the same so far in all the states. Such a contract was made as a national legal institute - so that the parties did not have to agree expressely on the applicable law. That is why the closest connection criterion shall be applied. In this way, such a contract turns out to be an imperfect private international law agreement. It is this that gives rise to the question of which legal regime shall govern the breaking, modification and annulment of the contract. Even in this respect the applicable law has retained the same content: all the newly formed states have taken over former Federal Law on Obligations (LO). Potential legal grounds are, therefore, the same: clausula rebus sic stantibus and error juris. 3. Inheritance. The sources of inheritance law were, prior to the dissolution, within the jurisdiction of the constituent republics, and today exist as law of the newly formed states .in the unchanged text. The inter-local conflict of laws used to be dealt with by applying the Federal Law on Inter-Local Conflict of Laws. The first question to be addressed is, therefore, whether in the circumstances of state succession, the conflict of laws will be treated as an inter-local or international conflict of laws. A fact relevant for the answer is whether a death of de cujus occured prior to the breakup of SFRY or following it. It is also important, particularly due to the war, to define the applicable law under which a missing person shall be declared dead and legal effects of such a declaration. Concerning both inter-local and international conflict of laws, before and following the breakup, different principles have been applied in passing on property under the provisions of the testament or the rules of intestacy. (a) In case of intestacy, the right to inherit is decided in conformity with the national law of de сцјрѕ. applicable at tbe time of his deatii. Therefore, if the ciaimaot at the time of the death became a foreigner due to the state succession, rules applicable to foreigners in general shall be applied to him,. 263 (b) If there is a will, a number of questions are to be answered. First, the system of law applicable in respect of the form of the will should be defined (it is of essential importance if the will was made before or after the successon, as in the latter case the validity of the form is also defined according to the in favorem testamenti principle). Practical problems frequently occur when military testaments and oral wills are concerned. A key problem arises from the existing legal formulatons operating with notions of a state of war, threat of war, or mobilization, ets, white at the same time neither a state of war nor threat of imminent war and mobilization were formally declared in some of the states in the Yugoslav territory. The view has been taken here that the situation de facto shall be considered as valid. Secopdr the content of a will is to be assessed according to law governing the rules of intestacy, byt there also appears a specific problem of dignity of the beneficiaries of the will. Naimly, all the involved laws quote the evasion of military service, takinng part in foreign military units, etc. as causes of indignity. Such examples have been numerous in the Yugoslav case. It has been thus concluded that a literal interpretation of legal texts concerning dignity brings about absurd results. That is why it has been suggested that the judicial practice formulate legal standards of specific content. However the issue might be successfully settled only ifall the newly formed states adopt regulations on the amnesty of certai persons. 4. patrimonial and Family Relationships. By the very nature of the matter, irrespectively of the application of the modified acquired rights doctrine, a celebrated marriage, valid divorce or annulment of marriage, established parental relationships (no matter on what grounds), are transimetted unchanged in to the legal order of the successor state. However, there are some family law areas that may be affected bz succession. Two fundamental kinds of effects are the following: (a) on supstantive law and (b) procedural law relationships. (For the effect on (b) see the part on succession in civil proceedings). Adoption. The basic sources of this law were republican even prior to the dismembernent of SFRY, so that the first step should be the same as in the case of inheritance (interlocal or international conflict of laws). The validity of an adoption is governed by the legal regime which was in effect at the time of the adoption (the predecessor state s law). The succession that was carried out during the adoption procedure may bring about varied consequences regarding: legal effect of the adoption on matrimonial and inheritance relationships, and effects of the changed nationality on the relationship established by the adoption. Whether the adoption represents an obstacle to marriage, it is decided according to the national law of the intended spouses, with necessary lege fori corrections. If a certain kind of adoption represents an obstacle to marriage, then it should be found out, under the law governing the validity of the adoption, what kind of adoption is in question (adoptio plena, adoptio minus plena). The same principle is applicable to inheritance. Change of nationality cannot affect an alrady established adoption relationship. Guardianship. A starting point there is a definition of the institution of guardianship either as a predominantly public law or private law institution. Naimly, it depends on the answer to this question whether the rigrt of a foreigner to be the guardian of ą national will be disputed. Taking into consideration laws of all the newly formed 264 yugoslav states relating to requirements for appointing a guardian, it my be concluded thai private law elements prevail in the legal structure of this institute. Thus, in principle, the right of guardianship would not be confined to nationals alone, thoug exeptions arc olso possible. The regime of matrimonial property rights. Assuming that a marrigc was celebrated uder the predecessor stated legal order, prior to the succession, the previous legal regulations also govern the regime of matrimonial property rights. The regime of the matrimonial property rights of the successor state is applicable if (lie question of ils dissolution or a different formulation is raised following the succession. This question arises due to a divorce or annulment of marriage, death of one or both spoucs, or usu capio between the spouses. If there has been a change of the former nationality of one or both spouses due to the succession, the applicable law will be decided by the legal order of the successor state. Having in mind that the law of the same content is still applicable in all the newly formed states, a change of nationality implies a change in the regime of matrimonial property rights. This gaves rise to the question whwthwr it is necessary to annul the original regime of the matrimonial property rights first, or the new regime of matrimonial properly rights comes into force with immediate effect without the annulment of the former. 5. The Effect of Succession in Civil Proceedings. The Yugoslav case of state succession in relation to civil proceedings in course at the time of the succession has brought about three types of consequences: (a) all the courts have changed their identity (naimly, the state ti which niez belong), (b) some national court proceedings have changed into proceedings with foreign elements due to the change of nationality and (or) domicile of the parties, (c) there has arisen a question of the validity of contracts with procedural I, ai effects (arbitration agreements, prorogatie, judicial settlements). (a) The essential procedural effect of the change of court identity, under the competent legal regime whose content has remained the same so far in all the newly formed states (the basic source being the Lw on Litigation Procedure - ZPP), is that courts, as state organs, have lost their former competence. As far as procedural law is concerned, a loss of competence due to succession results in the interruption of ex lege procedure untili the successor state establishes a new judical order. This order, which forms part of a public law, is original. In the majority of the newly formed states, a change of the legal and judical order was carried out not only in the juristic but in temporal minute as well, so that the interruption olso lasted that long. Howevr, the effect of the interruption of proceedings inplies not only that the instituted proceedings stopped, but that eil relevant limitations of action were interrupted as well, and they, once the proceedings are resumed, start to ran anew. It has turned out, nevertheless, that courts of the newlz formed states have not respected the legal effects of the interruption, and it has been concluded inthe present study that the judgments made in spite of the legal interruption are void, preventing thus a mutual recognation and enforcment. Change of court identity gives rise to a prticular important question of legal effects of the actions that had alredy been brought. Assuming that a succession was carried out after an action has been brought, there arises a question whether legal effects of the action are transmitted into the successor s legal order or not. Regarding substantive legal effects (interruption of limitations of action, adverse possesion, etc), it has been concluded here that they remain valid under the successoť s legal order. However, this is not the case with procedural effects. Whether perpetuatio fori will transform into perpetuatio iurisdictionis, it depends on of private international law of the state the court belongs to. In te Yugoslav 265 case, the content of the applicabe law is still the same, as all the newly formed states have taken over ZRSZ (ZMPP). On the assumption that, due to the succession, a court of another newly formed foreign state has now assumed exclusive competence, the court before which the action has been initiated has to reject it. If there exists no exc lusive jurisdiction of a court of a newly formed foreign state, there is no question of jurisdiction perpetuary any more - as the court changed its identity, i.e. the state it belongs to, but rather whether the new legal order prescribes its jurisdiction in the given case. Due to the change of court identity, there arises the problem of multiple pending^ claims. Until the succession it was the matter of national law. Following the succession, the change of court identity caused the transformation of matters of national law into those of multiple pending claims before both the foreign and the domestic court, which are to be settled by applying private international law rules of the state the court belong to. (b) A change of the nationality and (or) domicile of the parties, due to which a former national litigation becomes a litigation with a foreign element, updates the issue of the law relevant for assessing capacity litigation and capacity to appear in law, valid representation of parties, the position of parties under procedural law who, at the time of bringing the action, werw nationals of the state, but due to succession become foreigners, and, particulary, the question of valid notification in the circumstances of the Yugoslav crisis. When some of those questions are concerned, the succession revived those airedy outstanding problems in litigations including foreign elements, and gave rise to specifier problems regarding others, there is a specific problem of cautio iudicatum solvi on the assumption that the plaintiff was a national citiyen at the time of initiating the procidings and that later on, during the proceedings, become a foreigner due to the succession. Judical practice is recommended here to take the position that the defendant may not have right to security for costs (cautioiudicatum solvi). As for notification the Yugoslav crisis has brought about axtremely grave consequences. Notification through diplomatic ways in relations between the majority of the newly formed Yugoslav states has not been possible at all. Consular notification, according to the relevant law, is valid only when it is addressed to the parties who are national citizens. Notification through an attorney empowered to receive acts in writing or a temporary rwpresentative may be apt for abuses, so that the position has been taken that the requirements for appointing these representatives should be very strictly interpreted. The only way of notification that fully ensures interests of a party resident abroad (in one of the newly formed stgates, and outsideof the state the court belongst to) is by appointing a representative in that state, which would be done by the party itself. However, in none of the newly formed states is the represenataion of a party by a duly authorized representative obligatory. A judgment enforced before the succession, according ti the modified acquired rights doctrine, has the effect of a domestic judgment with all the effects it brings about. However, if fillowing the succession an extraordinary remedy is granted, due to which the judgment is altered, it shall be regarded as a foreign judgment. In case of a partial alteration, the same judgment mayy be partially domestic and partially foreign. (c) Regarding effects of succession on an arbitration or prorogatio agreement concluded under the legal order of the predecessor state, it has to be seen first if the arbitration the competence of which had been agreed, became foreign for the parties, i.e. if that was the case with the coutr of prorogued competence. In both cases - the arbitration, i.e. court is foreign, and the parties are national - the concluded agreement is not valid any more. However, if at least one party is a foreigner, the validity of the arbitration agreement and prorogatio depends on the will of the parties to the contract. 266 The same solution is in principle valid for the judicial settlement made prior to the succession as for the judgment enforced prior to the succession. 6. Recognición of Post - Yugoslav Foreign Judicial and Arbitration Decisions. All the newly formed states have taken over the relevant federal legislation in this area. That is why regulations of the same content shall bee applied to the recognition procedure. It follows from this that the recognition of these decisions will be discussed either prejudicially or as an essential matter. In the latter case, all the states will apply their laws on noncontentious procedure which are different as they were previously within the competence of the republics, constituent members of SFRY. On defining the notion of post-Yugoslav foreign judgments. The breakup of SFRY affected the qualification of a number of judgments as domestic or foreign. The judgments are subject to the principle set out in point 5 of this Summary. Those which under that principle are regardet as foreign are to be subjected to the recognition procedure. In case of a partial alteration, the judgment is mixed, and only the part regarded sa foreign is subjected to the recognition procedure. The same principle is applicable to arbitration decisions. The arbitration decision enforced prior to succession is regardet as domestic all newly formed states. Requirements for recognation. Problems arise in respect of reciprocity as a condition for recognation, particulary concering judical decisions. As far as content is concerned, all the states require the existence of the so-called substantive reciprocity. It means that they will recognize judgments of other states on similar ör not significantly more difficult conditions. Taking into account that laws of identical content have been taken over, it follows that substantive reciprocity is possible. Howevr, there is an issue arising at the level of the requirement for the so-called reciprocity in fact. It is the questionable if any of the newly formed states have recognized in practice decisions mede by others. Taking into consideration that such a short time has passed since the breakup and difficulties impeting the legal traffic, it becomes doubtable whether the condition for a de facto recognition can be satisfied at all. An immediate conclusion would be that the existence of a de facto reciprocity will be hardly provable. However, the fact that in laws of all the newly formed states the condition of reciprocity has been formulated in a negativ form highly affects this conclusion. The negative formulation of the condition og reciprocity - the burden of proof as to its nonexistence - is placed on the party opposing the recognition. If both the court and the party fail to prove the nonexistence of reciprocity, or if it is proved that there have been no requests for recognition of judgment of the domestic state, the reciprocity shall be regarded as existing. The realization of this condition is particularly favoured by the fact that its proving is confined to particularly restricted legal areas (if the recognition of divorce is requested, the condition of reciprocity is to be proved in the same area). It follows that a foreign divorce shall be recognized always, unless it is proved that domestic divorces are not recognized in the given state. The same rule applies if it is proved that domestic decisions, for ¡stance, concerning suits on motherhood and fatherhood are not recognized inthe given state. 7. Attacks pn Post-Yugoslav Arbitration Decisions. In all the newly formed states legal means of attacks on arbitration decisions are appeal (only if it has been specifically agreed) and action for annulment (in accordance with the law). The only question having a specific importance in the light of the Yugoslav crisis is: can there exist a post-Yugoslav arbitration decision which would be at the same time a foreign decision in all the newly formed Yugoslav states? A positive answer given in this text due to the interpretation of the applicable rule implies the following two conclusions: (a) apatrid arbitration decisions cannot be annulled in any of the newly formed states, (b) the same decision cannot be 267 directy applied in any of the newly formed states and is therefore subject to the recognition procedure in each of them. Pensions, Right to a pension, irrespectable where it was gained, should be treated as acquired right, according to International Convenant on Economic. Social and Culural Rights, and according to Convention of ILO on Social Security. Therefore, legislations of newly formed Yugoslav states are obliged to provide for legal garantee in mentioned sense. In the case of treatying all newly formed states, as a seperated sovereignyties in international law relations, obligations to pay pension transfere to ail of tham, when federal pensiones are in question
adam_txt	SADRŽAJ UVOD . OPSTI DEO GLAVA PRVA PROMENA SUVERENITETA I SUKCESIJA DRŽAVA KAO INSTITUT MAĐUNARODNOG JAVNOG PRAVA . 9 I UČENJA О SUKCESIJI DRŽAVA . 9 1. Teorijska shvatanja u XIX veku .,. 9 2. Teorijska shvatanja u XX veku . 1 3 (a)Uopšte . ІЗ (b) Definisanje pojma sukcesije država . 14 (c) Izvori prava . 16 II PREGLED MEĐUNARODNOJAVNOPRAVNIH POSLEDICA SUKCESIJE . 17 GLAVA DRUGA UTICAJ PROMENA I SUKCESIJE DRŽAVA NA PRIVATNOPRAVNE ODNOSE I MIHOVU SUDSKU ZAŠTITU . 1 9 1. Sukcesija država sa stanovišta medjunarodnog privatnog prava . 19 2. Metodologija izbora merodavnog prava . 21 3. Privatnopravne posledice sukcesije - opšta razmatranja . 22 4. Pojedinačne posledice sukcesije . 26 (a) Napomene . 26 (b) Državljanstvo . 26 (c) Uticaj sukcesije na međjunarodne ugovore .· 29 (d) Uticaj sukcesije na privatnopravne obaveze države . 42 (e) Uticaj sukcesije na pravo svojine na nepokretnostima, nasleđivanje i bračne i porodične odnose . 43 (f) Uticaj sukcesije na gradjanske sudske postupke .,. 43 GLAVA TREĆA PROMENA SUVERENITETA I SUKCESIJA DRŽAVA KAO KREATORI NOVIH MEDJUNARODNOPRIVATNOPRAVNIH ODNOSA . 47 I DEFINISANJE PROBLEMA . 47 1. Zadatak međunarodnog privatnog prava . 47 2. Postjugoslovenski element . 50 II STANJE IZVORA MEĐUNARODNOG PRIVATNOG PRAVA U ZEMLJAMA NASTALIM NA EX-YU PROSTORU . 51 A) Međunarodni izvori . 52 B) Unutrašnji izvori . 53 III REŠAVANJE PROBLEMA . 55 1. Rešavanje intertemporalnog post ¡ugoslovenskog sukoba zakona . 55 (a) Problemi na nivou kolizionih zakona . 55 (b) Problemi na nivou merodavnog materijalnog pravu . 57 з 2. Rcšavanje teritorijalnog postjugoslovenskog sukoba zakona . 59 (a)Uopšle .<. 59 (b) Državljanstvo . 60 (c) Prebivalište (domicil) . 67 (d) Boravište . 74 IV RECIPROCITET . 75 V UTICAJ RASPADA EX-YU NA PROMENU PRIRODE PRAVNIH ODNOSA .:. 78 POSEBNI DEO Deo prvi - UTICAJ SUKCESIJE DRŽAVA NA MATERIJALNOPRAVNE ODNOSE Glava prva -PRAVO SVOJINE NA NEPOKRETNOSTIMA I SUKCESIJA DRŽAVA . 81 I GRANICE ZAHVATA DRŽAVE U PRAVO SVOJINE . 82 1. Svojina kao ljudsko pravo . 82 2. Univerzalnost garantije svojine . 83 3. Ustavna garantija, zakonsko uredjenje i ustavnosudska zaštita u SFR Jugoslaviji, u SR Jugoslaviji i u drugim novoobrazovanim državama na prostoru bivše SFRJ . 83 4. Ustavna garantija svojine kao dvovrsna - garantija svojine kao ustanove (instituciona garantija)i garantija konkretnog prava svojine (individualna garantija) . 84 5. Granuja svojine kao ustanove (instituciona garantija) . 85 (a) Predmet garantije - stvarnopravni pojam svojine i širi pojam svojine 85. (b) Zagarantovana sadržina instituta svojine - bitni minimum pojma . 87 6. Ustavnosudska, redovna sudska i upravnosudska zaštita prava svojjne . 90 II PRAVNI REŽIM SVOJINE NA NEPOKRETNOSTIMA U USLOVIMA SUKCESIJE . ~ . .:. 91 l.Uticaj sukcesije država na režim prava svojine . 91 2. Garantije svojine u Ustavu SRJ i drugih država na području bivše SFRJ 92. ■ (a) Instituciona garantija . 92 (b) Individualna garantija . 95 3. Povreda garantije svojine u propisima о prometu svojine na nepokretnostima 97 Ш UTICAJ SUKCESIJE NA STICANJE PRAVA SVOJINE NA NEPOKRETNOSTIMA, POSEBNO S OBZIROM NA PROMENU DRŽAVLJANSTVA STICAOCA . 107 1. Stanje pre raspada . : 107 2. Stanje posle raspada SFRJ i formiranja sukcesorskih država . 108 (a) Sticanje na osnovu pravnog posla .·.—. 109 (b) Sticanje na osnovu modifikovanog pravnog posla . 111 (c) Uticaj sukcesije na održaj prava svojine na nepokretnostima .-. 112 (d) Pravo gradjenja . 114 (e) Gradjenje na tudjem zemljištu . 115 (f) Sticanje mortis causa . 115 3. Izbor merodavnog prava za slučaj da se nepokretnost nalazi na teritoriji više država nastalih na području bivše SFRJ .■. 116 4 Glava druga - DEJSTVO PROMENE SUVERENITETA NA OBLIGACIONE UGOVORE . 1 17 I ODREĐIVANJE PROBLEMA . 117 II DA U SE UGOVOR UNUTRAŠNJEG PRAVA MOŽE PREOBRAZITI U UGOVOR SA STRANIM ELEMENTOM . 119 III PRAVO SFRJ KAO LEX CAUSAE . 124 IV DA LI JE NOVODOŠLI STRANI ELEMENT PROMENJENA OKOLNOST - RAZLOG ZA RASKID UGOVORA ILI OSNOV ZA NJEGOVO PONIŠTENJE . 125 V ZAKLJUČAK . 128 Glava treća - PORODIČNOPRAVNE POSLEDICE PROMENE DRŽAVNOPRAVNOG IDENTITTETA SFRJ . 1 31 UVOD . 131 I RAZNOVRSNE POSLEDICE IZMENE DRŽAVNOPRAVNOG IDENTITETA SFRJ . 1 32 II NOVOPOSTAVLJENA PRAVNA PITANJA PO IZMENI PRAVNOG PORETKA SFRJ . 133 1. Uticaj državnopravne transformacije na sticanje prava i obaveza iz Porodičnog prava . 133 2. Uticaj državnopravne transformacije na sticanje prava i obaveza u Porodičnom pravu . 1 34 (a) Uslovi zaključenja braka . 1 35 (b) Bračno-imovinski režim . 137 (c) Roditeljskopravni odnos . 139 (d) Usvojenje . 141 (e) Starateljstvo . 141 (f) Ostalo . 141 III ZAKLJUČAK . 142 Glava četvrta - UTICAJ SUKCESIJE NA NASLEĐIVANJE . 145 IUOPŠTE . 145 Π OSNOVNE PRETPOSTAVKE ZA NASLEĐIVANJE . 146 1. Smrt ostavioca . 147 1.1. Proglašenje nestalog lica za umrlog . 147 1.2. Dokazivanje smrti . 148 І.ЗКотогуеті . 149 2. Zaostavština . 149 2.1. Nasledjivanje poljoprivrednog zemljišta . 150 III ZAKONSKO NASLEĐIVANJE . 150 1. Pravo merodavno za zakonsko nasleđivanje . 150 1.1. Uticaj sastava zaostavštine na odredjivanje merodavnog prava . 153 2. Punovažnost osnova pozivanja na nasleđe . 154 3. Sposobnost nasleđivanja .;. 155 4. Dostojnost za nasleđivanje . 156 5. Država kao následník . 158 IV TESTAMENTALNO NASLEĐIVANJE . 159 1. Pravo merodavno za nasleđivanje testamentalnih následníka . 159 2. Punovažnost testamenta . 161 2.1. Testamentalna sposobnost ostavioca . 161 2.2. Punovažnost testamenta u pogledu forme . 162 2.2.1. Punovažnost vojničkog testamenta . 163 2.2.2. Punovažnost usmenog testamenta . 164 2.3. Mogući sukob zakona forme i zakona nasleđivanja . 164 2.4. Punovažnost testamenta u pogledu sadržine . 165 2.4.1. Pravno lice kao testamentami následník. 165 V NASLEDNOPRAVNA DEJSTVA POJEDINIH UGOVORA . 166 VI NÁSLEDNÍČKA IZJAVA . 167 Deo drugi - UTICAJ SUKCESIJE DRŽAVA NA GRAĐANSKE SUDSKE POSTUPKE Glava prva - UVODNA RAZMATRANJA . 170 I PREOBRAŽAVANJE DOMAĆIH SUDOVA U STRANE SUDOVE . 170 II PREOBRAŽAVANJE UNUTRAŠNJIH SUDSKIH POSTUPAKA U POSTUPKE SA STRANIM ELEMENTOM . 170 1. Promena državljanstva stranaka . 170 2. Promena prebivališta stranaka . 171 III UTICAJ SUKCESIJE NA PROCESNOPRAVNE UGOVORE . 171 Glava druga - PROCESNOPRAVNE POSLEDICE PREOBRAŽA VANJA DOMAĆIH SUDOVA U STRANE SUDOVE . 171 I PRAVNE POSLEDICE VEĆ ZASNOVANIH SUDSKIH POSTUPAKA . 171 1. Pravne posledice podnošenja tužbe sudu . 171 2. Pravne posledice dostavljanja tužbe tuženom . 174 II UTICAJ SUKCESIJE NA VIŠESTRUKU LITISPENDENCIJU . 175 1. Preobražavanje domaćih litispendencija u Htispendenciju pred stranim i pred domaćim sudom . 175 2. Učenja o (Orelevanciji parnice pred stranim sudom . 175 3. Vreme otpočinjanja toka parnice .-. 177 4. Ocena identiteta predmeta spora . 177 5. Uzajamnost . 178 6. Ranije řešeno pitanje dvostruke litispendencije .-. 178 Ш IZVOĐENJE DOKAZA U INOSTRANSTVU . 179 1. Opšti uslovi za izvodjenju dokaza .*. 179 2. Dokazivanje koje je izveo domaci sud pre nego što se preobrazio u strani . 180 3. Legalizacija isprava . 180 IV DEJSTVA PRAVOSNAŽNOSTI . 182 1. Slučaj u kome je presuda postala pravosnažna pre sukcesije .:. 182 2. Slučaj u kome je presuda donesena ali nije postala pravosnažna . 184 Glava treća - PROCESNOPRAVNE POSLEDICE PREOBRAŽAVAN JA UNUTRAŠNJIH SUDSKIH POSTUPAKA U POSTUPKE SA STRANIM ELEMENTOM . 185 I ISKLJUČIVA NADLEŽNOST SUDA SRJ . 185 1. Pitanje zakonodavne kompetencije za uredjivanje isključive nadležnosti . 185 2. Uticaj sukcesije na aktuelno tumačenje pravila о isključivoj nadležnosti suda SRJ . 186 3. Lista sporova i pravnih stvari za koje važe pravila о isključivoj nadležnosti suda SRJ . 188 (a) Isključiva nadležnost u parničnom postupku . 188 (b) Isključiva nadležnost u vanparničnom postupku . 189 (c) Isključiva vansudska nadležnost . 189 6 II SVOJSTVA STRANAKA I NJIHOVO ZASTUPANJE . 189 1. Stranačka sposobnost . 189 (a) Fizičko lice . 189 (b) Pravno lice . 19 1 (c) lus standi in iudicio . 191 2. Parnična sposobnost . 194 (a) Fizičko lice . 194 (b) Pravno lice i oni koji imaju ius standi in iudicio . 194 3. Zastupanje stranaka . 194 (a) Zakonski zastupnik .'. 194 (b) Punomoćnik . 198 III PROCESNI POLOŽAJ STRANAKA - STRANIH DRŽAVLJANA . 199 1. Procesnopravni položaj tužioca . 199 (a) pravo pristupa sudu . 199 (b) Aktorska kaucija . 200 2. Procesnopravni položaj tuženog . 202 3. Poštovanje načela kontradiktornosti u građanskim sudskim postupcima sa postjugoslovenskim elementom . 204 (a) Bavljenje (nalaženje) stranke i njenog zakonskog zastupnika u inostranstvu . 204 (b) Dostavljanje stranom državljaninu u inostranstvu . 205 (c) Dostavljanje domaćem državljaninu u inostranstvu . 207 (d) Odnos između pravila о unutrašnjem dostavljanju i dostavljanju u inostranstvu . 208 (e) Promena adrese u toku parnice . 209 Glava četvrta - UTICAJ SUKCESIJE NA UGOVORE SA PROCESNOPRAVNIM DEJSTVOM . 210 IUOPŠTE . 210 II ARBITRÁŽNI I PROROGACIONI SPORAZUM . 210 1. Uticaj sukcesije na arbitrážni sporazum i na arbitražno suđenje . 210 (a) Sukcesija pre otpočinjanja arbitražnog postupka . 210 (b) Sukcesija u toku arbitražnog postupka . 211 (c) sukcesija posle donošenja arbitrážne odluke . 213 2. Uticaj sukcesije na prorogaciju nadležnosti . 213 (a) Izričiti prorogacioni sporazum . 213 (b) Prećutna prorogacija . 214 III SUDSKO PORAVNANJE . 216 l.Uopšte . 216 2. Sredstva za pobijanje sudskog poravnanja . 216 3. Razlozi za pobijanje sudskog poravnanja . 217 4. Uspešno pobijeno sudsko poravnanje . 217 Glava peta - PRIZNANJE I IZVRŠENJE STRANIH - POSTJUGOSLOVENSKIH - ODLUKA . 219 I POJAM STRANIH - POSJUGOSLOVENSKIH SUDSKIH ODLUKA . 219 1. Koje su sudske odluke podobne za priznanje u SRJ . 219 2. Pojam strane (posjugoslovenske) sudske odluke . . 221 II POJAM POSTJUGOSLOVENSKIH ARBITRAŽNIH ODLUKA . 223 1. Unutrašnji (interni) izvori arbitražnog prava . 223 2. Međunarodni izvori arbitražnog prava . 226 III PRIZNANJE POSTJUGOSLOVENSKIH ODLUKA - POJAM, POSTUPAK I USLOVI . 227 1. Pojam priznanja postjugoslovenskih odluka . 227 2. Postupak priznanja posjugoslovenskih odluka . 228 3. Uslovi (pretpostavke) priznanja postjugoslovenskih odluka . 230 3.1. Uslovi priznanja postjugoslovenskih sudskih odluka . 231 3.2. Uslovi priznanja postjugoslovensjih arbitražnih odluka . 235 Glava šesta - POBIJANJE POSTJUGOSLOVENSKIH ARBITRAŽNIH ODLUKA . 236 1. Vrste pravnih sredstava za pobijanje arbitražnih posjugoslovenskih odluka 236 2. Čija se arbitrážna odluka može poništiti pred domaćim sudom . 237 3. Da li svaka arbitrážna odluka mora imati svoju državnu pripadnost . 239 Deo treci - UTICAJ SUKCESIJE DRŽAVA NA SOCIJALNOPRAVNE ODNOSE Glava prva - OČUVANJE PRAVA NA PENZIJU U OKOLNOSTIMA POSLE TERITORIJALNIH PROMENA NA JUGOSLOVENSKOM PROSTORU. . 243 I. POSTAVLJANJE PROBLEMA . 243 II. KARAKTER I MEĐUNARODNO REGULISANJE PRAVA NA PENZIJU . 244 III. REGULISANJE PRAVA NA PENZIJU, STICANJE, OSTVARIVANJE I ISPLATA PENZIJE U SFRJ . 250 IV. PRAVO NA PENZIJU KAO STEČENO PRAVO . 253 V. DA LI SU DRŽAVE NA BIVŠEM JUGOSLOVENSKOM PROSTORU DUŽNE DA OČUVAJU STEČENO PRAVO NA PENZIJU . 254 VI. MOGUĆI PREDLOŽI ZA REŠAVANJE PITANJA U VEZI SA OČUVANJEM PRAVA NA PENZIJU . 255 . ZAKLJUČCI . 258 SUMMARY . 259 STVARNI REGISTAR . 269 259 THE EFFECTS OF DISSOLUTION OF SFR YUGOSLAVIA AND OF ESTABLISHING OF FR YUGOSLAVIA ON PRIVATE LAW AND SOCIAL LAW RELATIONS SUMMARY This study has been made as an answer to the need to solve a number of legal issues brought about by the collapse of the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) and the establishing of new states in the territory of former Yugoslavia. Most practical problems, within the private law area, have arisen concerning the right of real property, contracts, inheritance, matrimonial and family relationships, pensions and legal procedure related to these matters. A number of theoretical questions figuring between public international law and private international law had to be dealt with first. A basic problem arising when an international subject ceases to exist, is the formulation of criteria for the transfer of private relationships, laid down in the legal order of the predecessor state, into the legal order of successor states. After analysing 19th century theories, it has been concluded that all those points of view could be broadly presented in two fundamental theses: (a) - succession pf states should conform with the succession as provided for in private law, so that in principle, all private law relationships, laid down in the preceding legal order, automatically pass into the new legal order; (b) - the extinction of an international subject implies the extinction of its legal order, and the successor state freely formulates its new legal order, due to which private law relationships, laid down under the preceding sovereignity, do not pass into the legal order of the new state. It was acknowledged at that time already that these two criteria had never been applied exclusively. That is why it is of suprime importance to find out criteria for defining those private rights that automatically pass into the new legal order, i.e., survive the extinction of the predecessor state. It is this issue that has been widely discussed in modern literature. The basic criterion for deciding which legal relatinships laid down in the former regíate shall be transfered into the new legal order, has been found in the acquired rights doctrine. The authors of the present study have concluded that this doctrine, in its original form, is not sufficiently accurate as to be applied to the Yugoslav case. They have thus searched for a more reliable criterion and concluded that the acquired rights doctrine should be modified in the following way: - acquired rights imply those private rights directly based on human rights, set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Internştional Convenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Convenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; - the content of these rights is set out in high-ranking written sources of international law and therefore there can be no doubt about their content and scope, unlike the classic acquired rights doctrine; ,- the classic doctrine of acquired rights was not in effect as a legal institute (not even in indication) in the legal order of former Yugoslavia, nor is today, so that its application could and cat» be denied, unlike human rights concerned, as both Convenants have been signed and ratified and now remained binding on ail the legal orders of the newly formed states. , practical legał effets of such modified doctrine of acquired rights result, m the case of Yugostatvia, in prec^ely formulated rules: (a) - the validity of a legal relationship is 260 governed by the legal oreder of the predecessor state; (b) - a legal relationship valid in the legal order of the predecessor state and constituting acquired right in the mentioned sense, is transferred automatically and unchanged into the legal order of the successor state; (c) - the legal order of successor state may not tuch by any of its acts on such acquired rights; (d) - ifit acts contrary to this, successor state is obliged to pay compensation. Apart from settling this essential issue, discussions have been also centered on the inter-temporal conflict of laws (the relationship between the predecessor state's private international law and that of the successor state), the transfer of international agreements concluded by the predecessor state into the legal order of the successor state, succession in matters of nationality, the problem of defining domicile in the new legal circumstances and, finally, the existence of reciprocity in the Yugoslav case. Inter-Temporal Conflict of Laws. This conflict of laws arises as a conflict between rules concerning substantive, procedural and collision laws, in relation to the substantive law regulations, the view has been taken that transitory regulations of the successor state should be complied with and if they cannot provide an answer, general succession rules of the given state shall be applied. As to the legal procedure rules, the very content of a number of acts of SFRY, by virtue of which the predecessor state's legislation was taken over, the inter-temporal rule that procedural regulations should be applied with immediate effect, has been questioned. It has been thus concluded that they should be applied solely to those civil proceedings instituted following the succession, with exceptions analysed in a particular chapter of this study. The inter-temporal conflict of collision regulations should be settled in accordance with transitory regulations of the state to which the court or other competent organ belong. The fact that regulations previously in effect appear as foreign in the successor state does not affect the already taken position. International Agreements. The view set out in the Vienna Convention of 1978 on succession of states in respect of treaties has been accepted here. Although the Convention has not been put into effect yet (we would like to point out that it has been ratified by SFRY), its principles mostly represent codified international customs. This position remain unquestioned in literature of a majority of newly emerged states following the breakup of Yugoslavia. Nationality. Prior to dismembrement of SFRY, legislative competence was devided between the federation and its constituent members (republics) in matters of nationality. Federal nationality was defined by federal sources of law, and that of republics, by their own sources of law. Even before breakup, it became disputable which of the two nationalities was original: whether the Yugoslav nationality was to be acquired following the acquisition of republican nationality or vice versa. The dissolution of SFRY made this already compex legal situation even more complicated. All the questions analysed so far can be reduced to three essential ones: (a) Whether the nationality of the successor state is acquired automatically, upon the establishing of its sovereignity? (b) Which subjects automatically acquire the nationality of the successor state, and which of them acquire the nationality under a constitutive act of the successor state? (c) When and according to what criteria does the nationality of SFRY, as a predecessor state, cease to exist? (a) The acquiring of the successor state's nationality is governed exclusively by its law. In the post-Yugoslave comparative law there have appeared varied solutions, but all these legal orders provide for such categories of persons that automatically acquire the new nationality. (b) In most cases, former citizens (nationals) of the republic m whose therritory die successor state has been established, automatically acquire the nationality of the successor state. On the other hand, the acquiring of nationality on the ground of a 261 constitutive act issued by authorities, is provided for those persons who have territorial links with the newly formed state and have already the SFRY nationality, irrespective of their former republican nationality. (c) The loss of the nationality of the predecessor state (SFRY) is governed by SFRY law. Having in mind the fact that the Federal Rebublic of Yugoslavia (FRY) claims continuity with the predecessor state, there arises a question whether all the persons who have not acquired nationality of any of the newly established states became citizens (nationals) of FRY ex lege. The answer to this question depends on whether there is continuity between SFRY and FRY or not. Arguments concerning both positions and their effects have been analysed and presented in this study. Domicile. This legal issue has an important role in view of defining international competence and the enjoyment of a number of private rights. The starting point is that all persons, irrespective of their nationality, domiciled in the territory of the newly emerged states, have retained their domicile. Reciprocity. Reciprocity in relations with post-Yugoslav foreign element, due to reasons we do not need to explain, appears mostly as a political phenomenon. From legal point of view, it has been concluded that it would be desirable to make a "first step" in the fields of reciprocity so as to establich a reciprocity de facto and thus enable legal traffic, as there now exist no possibilities of establishing diplomatic reciprocity between majority of the newly formed states. In the Particular Part of this study, the principles formulated in the General Part have been applied to the areas of law set out hereafter. 1. Real Property (Immovable). The most important source of law in this area in SFRY was the Federal Law of Property Relationships (LPR). All the newly formed states have taken over this source and have been applying it, with certain modifications, as their own national law. A fundamental issue arising here was that relating to the application of a modified acquired rights doctrine. It has been concluded that all the new constitutions, including that of FRY, provide for institutional and individual garantees of the right to own property, which should undoubtedly ensure respect for the right of ownership of immovables acquired in the previous légal order, irrespective of present nationality and domicile of the titular. However, this principle has been essentially derogated in legislative practice of certain states formed in the territory of former Yugoslavia (Croatia and Serbia) in such way that titulars, now foreigners, have been deprived of the right to dispose of their property until the settlement of Yugoslav crisis. However, these acts do not provide for compensation to the titulars. Apart from this, one of these legislative acts contains such a ban only for citizens (nationals) of some of newly formed states. It should be also pointed out that a number of owners, due to the present regime of crossing the new state borders, have been practically prevented from access to their immovables, which also derogates their right to enjoy them. All these acts are seen in this study as not only contrary to the modified acquired rights doctrine, but stricto sensu, in collision with the constitutions of the newly formed states. Therefore, all the affected owners have become entitled to compensation from the state in the territory of which the immovables are sited. The effect of the state succession on the acquisition of ownership of immovables, which has not been completed, has been particularly analysed here. Cases appearing most often in practice are the following: (a) - a legal ground was completed under the regime of the predecessor state, the succession was carried out, but the estate was not registered (modus acquirendi was npt obtained); (b) - adverse possession began under the legal order of the predecessor state and has come to an end under the legal order of the successor state; 262 (с) a permission for biulding had been validly obtained prior to the succession, while the construction was completed following the succession. Apart from deciding the applicable law for assessing the legal ground (Justus titulus) and the modes of acquisition (modus acquirendii. which has been no particular problem in Yugoslav case ( the lex rei sitae principle is still applied and the fundamental sources of law have retained the same content so far), there has emerged a particularly difficult issue to be solved: whether an intended owner, who has become a foreigner before he fulfilled the modes of acquisition (modus acquirendi') requirements, shall acquire his property rights on the same conditions as domestic citizens (nationals), or on those provided for foreigners, under the law governing such relationships. Naimly, if one acquires the right according to the principle of international treatment, the regimes of all the newly formed states are the same and extremely restrictive. We wish to point out that this brings about the issue of reciprocity and of the "first step" to that effect. 2. Contracts. Two basic points of this issue have been discussed here: (a) - whether a contract concluded in former Yugoslavia (SFRY) has been transfered from national into international private law legal regime, following the breakup of the state and due to that fact that the parties to the contract have become of different nationalities; (b) - whether such a contract may be modified or annulled and on what grounds. (a) The answer to the first question is indisputable: such an agreement is subject to the private international law regime. (b) In order to answer the second question, it is first necessary to decide which is applicable law of the contract so as to assess the existence and terms for exercising the right to break, modify or annual the contract. As all the newly formed states have taken over the Federal Law on International Conflict of Laws (LICL), the criteria for deciding on which system governs the contract have remained the same so far in all the states. Such a contract was made as a national legal institute - so that the parties did not have to agree expressely on the applicable law. That is why the closest connection criterion shall be applied. In this way, such a contract turns out to be an imperfect private international law agreement. It is this that gives rise to the question of which legal regime shall govern the breaking, modification and annulment of the contract. Even in this respect the applicable law has retained the same content: all the newly formed states have taken over former Federal Law on Obligations (LO). Potential legal grounds are, therefore, the same: clausula rebus sic stantibus and error juris. 3. Inheritance. The sources of inheritance law were, prior to the dissolution, within the jurisdiction of the constituent republics, and today exist as law of the newly formed states .in the unchanged text. The inter-local conflict of laws used to be dealt with by applying the Federal Law on Inter-Local Conflict of Laws. The first question to be addressed is, therefore, whether in the circumstances of state succession, the conflict of laws will be treated as an inter-local or international conflict of laws. A fact relevant for the answer is whether a death of de cujus occured prior to the breakup of SFRY or following it. It is also important, particularly due to the war, to define the applicable law under which a missing person shall be declared dead and legal effects of such a declaration. Concerning both inter-local and international conflict of laws, before and following the breakup, different principles have been applied in passing on property under the provisions of the testament or the rules of intestacy. (a) In case of intestacy, the right to inherit is decided in conformity with the national law of de сцјрѕ. applicable at tbe time of his deatii. Therefore, if the ciaimaot at the time of the death became a foreigner due to the state succession, rules applicable to foreigners in general shall be applied to him,. 263 (b) If there is a will, a number of questions are to be answered. First, the system of law applicable in respect of the form of the will should be defined (it is of essential importance if the will was made before or after the successon, as in the latter case the validity of the form is also defined according to the in favorem testamenti principle). Practical problems frequently occur when military testaments and oral wills are concerned. A key problem arises from the existing legal formulatons operating with notions of a state of war, threat of war, or mobilization, ets, white at the same time neither a state of war nor threat of imminent war and mobilization were formally declared in some of the states in the Yugoslav territory. The view has been taken here that the situation de facto shall be considered as valid. Secopdr the content of a will is to be assessed according to law governing the rules of intestacy, byt there also appears a specific problem of dignity of the beneficiaries of the will. Naimly, all the involved laws quote the evasion of military service, takinng part in foreign military units, etc. as causes of indignity. Such examples have been numerous in the Yugoslav case. It has been thus concluded that a literal interpretation of legal texts concerning dignity brings about absurd results. That is why it has been suggested that the judicial practice formulate legal standards of specific content. However the issue might be successfully settled only ifall the newly formed states adopt regulations on the amnesty of certai persons. 4. patrimonial and Family Relationships. By the very nature of the matter, irrespectively of the application of the modified acquired rights doctrine, a celebrated marriage, valid divorce or annulment of marriage, established parental relationships (no matter on what grounds), are transimetted unchanged in to the legal order of the successor state. However, there are some family law areas that may be affected bz succession. Two fundamental kinds of effects are the following: (a) on supstantive law and (b) procedural law relationships. (For the effect on (b) see the part on succession in civil proceedings). Adoption. The basic sources of this law were republican even prior to the dismembernent of SFRY, so that the first step should be the same as in the case of inheritance (interlocal or international conflict of laws). The validity of an adoption is governed by the legal regime which was in effect at the time of the adoption (the predecessor state"s law). The succession that was carried out during the adoption procedure may bring about varied consequences regarding: legal effect of the adoption on matrimonial and inheritance relationships, and effects of the changed nationality on the relationship established by the adoption. Whether the adoption represents an obstacle to marriage, it is decided according to the national law of the intended spouses, with necessary lege fori corrections. If a certain kind of adoption represents an obstacle to marriage, then it should be found out, under the law governing the validity of the adoption, what kind of adoption is in question (adoptio plena, adoptio minus plena). The same principle is applicable to inheritance. Change of nationality cannot affect an alrady established adoption relationship. Guardianship. A starting point there is a definition of the institution of guardianship either as a predominantly public law or private law institution. Naimly, it depends on the answer to this question whether the rigrt of a foreigner to be the guardian of ą national will be disputed. Taking into consideration laws of all the newly formed 264 yugoslav states relating to requirements for appointing a guardian, it my be concluded thai private law elements prevail in the legal structure of this institute. Thus, in principle, the right of guardianship would not be confined to nationals alone, thoug exeptions arc olso possible. The regime of matrimonial property rights. Assuming that a marrigc was celebrated uder the predecessor stated legal order, prior to the succession, the previous legal regulations also govern the regime of matrimonial property rights. The regime of the matrimonial property rights of the successor state is applicable if (lie question of' ils dissolution or a different formulation is raised following the succession. This question arises due to a divorce or annulment of marriage, death of one or both spoucs, or usu capio between the spouses. If there has been a change of the former nationality of one or both spouses due to the succession, the applicable law will be decided by the legal order of the successor state. Having in mind that the law of the same content is still applicable in all the newly formed states, a change of nationality implies a change in the regime of matrimonial property rights. This gaves rise to the question whwthwr it is necessary to annul the original regime of the matrimonial property rights first, or the new regime of matrimonial properly rights comes into force with immediate effect without the annulment of the former. 5. The Effect of Succession in Civil Proceedings. The Yugoslav case of state succession in relation to civil proceedings in course at the time of the succession has brought about three types of consequences: (a) all the courts have changed their identity (naimly, the state ti which niez belong), (b) some national court proceedings have changed into proceedings with foreign elements due to the change of nationality and (or) domicile of the parties, (c) there has arisen a question of the validity of contracts with procedural I, ai effects (arbitration agreements, prorogatie, judicial settlements). (a) The essential procedural effect of the change of court identity, under the competent legal regime whose content has remained the same so far in all the newly formed states (the basic source being the Lw on Litigation Procedure - ZPP), is that courts, as state organs, have lost their former competence. As far as procedural law is concerned, a loss of competence due to succession results in the interruption of ex lege procedure untili the successor state establishes a new judical order. This order, which forms part of a public law, is original. In the majority of the newly formed states, a change of the legal and judical order was carried out not only in the juristic but in temporal minute as well, so that the interruption olso lasted that long. Howevr, the effect of the interruption of proceedings inplies not only that the instituted proceedings stopped, but that eil relevant limitations of action were interrupted as well, and they, once the proceedings are resumed, start to ran anew. It has turned out, nevertheless, that courts of the newlz formed states have not respected the legal effects of the interruption, and it has been concluded inthe present study that the judgments made in spite of the legal interruption are void, preventing thus a mutual recognation and enforcment. Change of court identity gives rise to a prticular important question of legal effects of the actions that had alredy been brought. Assuming that a succession was carried out after an action has been brought, there arises a question whether legal effects of the action are transmitted into the successor's legal order or not. Regarding substantive legal effects (interruption of limitations of action, adverse possesion, etc), it has been concluded here that they remain valid under the successoť's legal order. However, this is not the case with procedural effects. Whether perpetuatio fori will transform into perpetuatio iurisdictionis, it depends on of private international law of the state the court belongs to. In te Yugoslav 265 case, the content of the applicabe law is still the same, as all the newly formed states have taken over ZRSZ (ZMPP). On the assumption that, due to the succession, a court of another newly formed foreign state has now assumed exclusive competence, the court before which the action has been initiated has to reject it. If there exists no exc lusive jurisdiction of a court of a newly formed foreign state, there is no question of jurisdiction perpetuary any more - as the court changed its identity, i.e. the state it belongs to, but rather whether the new legal order prescribes its jurisdiction in the given case. Due to the change of court identity, there arises the problem of multiple pending^ claims. Until the succession it was the matter of national law. Following the succession, the change of court identity caused the transformation of matters of national law into those of multiple pending claims before both the foreign and the domestic court, which are to be settled by applying private international law rules of the state the court belong to. (b) A change of the nationality and (or) domicile of the parties, due to which a former national litigation becomes a litigation with a foreign element, updates the issue of the law relevant for assessing capacity litigation and capacity to appear in law, valid representation of parties, the position of parties under procedural law who, at the time of bringing the action, werw nationals of the state, but due to succession become foreigners, and, particulary, the question of valid notification in the circumstances of the Yugoslav crisis. When some of those questions are concerned, the succession revived those airedy outstanding problems in litigations including foreign elements, and gave rise to specifier problems regarding others, there is a specific problem of cautio iudicatum solvi on the assumption that the plaintiff was a national citiyen at the time of initiating the procidings and that later on, during the proceedings, become a foreigner due to the succession. Judical practice is recommended here to take the position that the defendant may not have right to security for costs (cautioiudicatum solvi). As for notification the Yugoslav crisis has brought about axtremely grave consequences. Notification through diplomatic ways in relations between the majority of the newly formed Yugoslav states has not been possible at all. Consular notification, according to the relevant law, is valid only when it is addressed to the parties who are national citizens. Notification through an attorney empowered to receive acts in writing or a temporary rwpresentative may be apt for abuses, so that the position has been taken that the requirements for appointing these representatives should be very strictly interpreted. The only way of notification that fully ensures interests of a party resident abroad (in one of the newly formed stgates, and outsideof the state the court belongst to) is by appointing a representative in that state, which would be done by the party itself. However, in none of the newly formed states is the represenataion of a party by a duly authorized representative obligatory. A judgment enforced before the succession, according ti the modified acquired rights doctrine, has the effect of a domestic judgment with all the effects it brings about. However, if fillowing the succession an extraordinary remedy is granted, due to which the judgment is altered, it shall be regarded as a foreign judgment. In case of a partial alteration, the same judgment mayy be partially domestic and partially foreign. (c) Regarding effects of succession on an arbitration or prorogatio agreement concluded under the legal order of the predecessor state, it has to be seen first if the arbitration the competence of which had been agreed, became foreign for the parties, i.e. if that was the case with the coutr of prorogued competence. In both cases - the arbitration, i.e. court is foreign, and the parties are national - the concluded agreement is not valid any more. However, if at least one party is a foreigner, the validity of the arbitration agreement and prorogatio depends on the will of the parties to the contract. 266 The same solution is in principle valid for the judicial settlement made prior to the succession as for the judgment enforced prior to the succession. 6. Recognición of Post - Yugoslav Foreign Judicial and Arbitration Decisions. All the newly formed states have taken over the relevant federal legislation in this area. That is why regulations of the same content shall bee applied to the recognition procedure. It follows from this that the recognition of these decisions will be discussed either prejudicially or as an essential matter. In the latter case, all the states will apply their laws on noncontentious procedure which are different as they were previously within the competence of the republics, constituent members of SFRY. On defining the notion of post-Yugoslav foreign judgments. The breakup of SFRY affected the qualification of a number of judgments as domestic or foreign. The judgments are subject to the principle set out in point 5 of this Summary. Those which under that principle are regardet as foreign are to be subjected to the recognition procedure. In case of a partial alteration, the judgment is mixed, and only the part regarded sa foreign is subjected to the recognition procedure. The same principle is applicable to arbitration decisions. The arbitration decision enforced prior to succession is regardet as domestic all newly formed states. Requirements for recognation. Problems arise in respect of reciprocity as a condition for recognation, particulary concering judical decisions. As far as content is concerned, all the states require the existence of the so-called substantive reciprocity. It means that they will recognize judgments of other states on similar ör not significantly more difficult conditions. Taking into account that laws of identical content have been taken over, it follows that substantive reciprocity is possible. Howevr, there is an issue arising at the level of the requirement for the so-called reciprocity in fact. It is the questionable if any of the newly formed states have recognized in practice decisions mede by others. Taking into consideration that such a short time has passed since the breakup and difficulties impeting the legal traffic, it becomes doubtable whether the condition for a de facto recognition can be satisfied at all. An immediate conclusion would be that the existence of a de facto reciprocity will be hardly provable. However, the fact that in laws of all the newly formed states the condition of reciprocity has been formulated in a negativ form highly affects this conclusion. The negative formulation of the condition og reciprocity - the burden of proof as to its nonexistence - is placed on the party opposing the recognition. If both the court and the party fail to prove the nonexistence of reciprocity, or if it is proved that there have been no requests for recognition of judgment of the domestic state, the reciprocity shall be regarded as existing. The realization of this condition is particularly favoured by the fact that its proving is confined to particularly restricted legal areas (if the recognition of divorce is requested, the condition of reciprocity is to be proved in the same area). It follows that a foreign divorce shall be recognized always, unless it is proved that domestic divorces are not recognized in the given state. The same rule applies if it is proved that domestic decisions, for ¡stance, concerning suits on motherhood and fatherhood are not recognized inthe given state. 7. Attacks pn Post-Yugoslav Arbitration Decisions. In all the newly formed states legal means of attacks on arbitration decisions are appeal (only if it has been specifically agreed) and action for annulment (in accordance with the law). The only question having a specific importance in the light of the Yugoslav crisis is: can there exist a post-Yugoslav arbitration decision which would be at the same time a foreign decision in all the newly formed Yugoslav states? A positive answer given in this text due to the interpretation of the applicable rule implies the following two conclusions: (a) apatrid arbitration decisions cannot be annulled in any of the newly formed states, (b) the same decision cannot be 267 directy applied in any of the newly formed states and is therefore subject to the recognition procedure in each of them. Pensions, Right to a pension, irrespectable where it was gained, should be treated as acquired right, according to International Convenant on Economic. Social and Culural Rights, and according to Convention of ILO on Social Security. Therefore, legislations of newly formed Yugoslav states are obliged to provide for legal garantee in mentioned sense. In the case of treatying all newly formed states, as a seperated sovereignyties in international law relations, obligations to pay pension transfere to ail of tham, when federal pensiones are in question
any_adam_object	1
any_adam_object_boolean	1
building	Verbundindex
bvnumber	BV022240071
ctrlnum	(OCoLC)451010094 (DE-599)BVBBV022240071
era	Geschichte 1991-1995 gnd
era_facet	Geschichte 1991-1995
format	Book
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>02464nam a2200517 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV022240071</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20111205 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">070124s1995 \|\|\|\| 00\|\|\| eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)451010094</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV022240071</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield><subfield code="a">srp</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-M382</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="080" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">341.2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Prestanak SFRJ</subfield><subfield code="b">Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ</subfield><subfield code="c">Vesna Rakić-Vodinelić ...</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="246" ind1="1" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Nestanak SFRJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Beograd</subfield><subfield code="b">Pravni Fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu</subfield><subfield code="c">1995</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">275 S.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">NT: Nestanak SFRJ. - Engl. Zsfassung u.d.T: The effects of dissolution of SFR Yugoslavia and of establishing of FR Yugoslavia on private law and social law relations</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1991-1995</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Jugoslavija - sukcesija države - družbena kriza - pravna država - Zvezna republika Jugoslavija</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Auflösung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4193468-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Staatensukzession</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4056621-3</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Rechtsfolge</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4193464-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Jugoslawien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4028966-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Föderative Republik Jugoslawien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4339067-5</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Jugoslawien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4028966-7</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Auflösung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4193468-4</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Staatensukzession</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4056621-3</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Rechtsfolge</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4193464-7</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Föderative Republik Jugoslawien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4339067-5</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1991-1995</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rakić-Vodinelić, Vesna</subfield><subfield code="e">Sonstige</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015451006&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015451006&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015451006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">909</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09049</subfield><subfield code="g">496</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
geographic	Jugoslawien (DE-588)4028966-7 gnd Föderative Republik Jugoslawien (DE-588)4339067-5 gnd
geographic_facet	Jugoslawien Föderative Republik Jugoslawien
id	DE-604.BV022240071
illustrated	Not Illustrated
index_date	2024-07-02T16:35:42Z
indexdate	2024-07-09T20:53:07Z
institution	BVB
language	English
oai_aleph_id	oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015451006
oclc_num	451010094
open_access_boolean
owner	DE-M382 DE-12
owner_facet	DE-M382 DE-12
physical	275 S.
publishDate	1995
publishDateSearch	1995
publishDateSort	1995
publisher	Pravni Fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu
record_format	marc
spelling	Prestanak SFRJ Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ Vesna Rakić-Vodinelić ... Nestanak SFRJ Beograd Pravni Fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu 1995 275 S. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier NT: Nestanak SFRJ. - Engl. Zsfassung u.d.T: The effects of dissolution of SFR Yugoslavia and of establishing of FR Yugoslavia on private law and social law relations Geschichte 1991-1995 gnd rswk-swf Jugoslavija - sukcesija države - družbena kriza - pravna država - Zvezna republika Jugoslavija Auflösung (DE-588)4193468-4 gnd rswk-swf Staatensukzession (DE-588)4056621-3 gnd rswk-swf Rechtsfolge (DE-588)4193464-7 gnd rswk-swf Jugoslawien (DE-588)4028966-7 gnd rswk-swf Föderative Republik Jugoslawien (DE-588)4339067-5 gnd rswk-swf Jugoslawien (DE-588)4028966-7 g Auflösung (DE-588)4193468-4 s Staatensukzession (DE-588)4056621-3 s Rechtsfolge (DE-588)4193464-7 s Föderative Republik Jugoslawien (DE-588)4339067-5 g DE-604 Geschichte 1991-1995 z Rakić-Vodinelić, Vesna Sonstige oth Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015451006&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015451006&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract
spellingShingle	Prestanak SFRJ Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ Jugoslavija - sukcesija države - družbena kriza - pravna država - Zvezna republika Jugoslavija Auflösung (DE-588)4193468-4 gnd Staatensukzession (DE-588)4056621-3 gnd Rechtsfolge (DE-588)4193464-7 gnd
subject_GND	(DE-588)4193468-4 (DE-588)4056621-3 (DE-588)4193464-7 (DE-588)4028966-7 (DE-588)4339067-5
title	Prestanak SFRJ Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ
title_alt	Nestanak SFRJ
title_auth	Prestanak SFRJ Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ
title_exact_search	Prestanak SFRJ Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ
title_exact_search_txtP	Prestanak SFRJ Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ
title_full	Prestanak SFRJ Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ Vesna Rakić-Vodinelić ...
title_fullStr	Prestanak SFRJ Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ Vesna Rakić-Vodinelić ...
title_full_unstemmed	Prestanak SFRJ Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ Vesna Rakić-Vodinelić ...
title_short	Prestanak SFRJ
title_sort	prestanak sfrj pravne posledice privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka sfrj i stvaranja srj
title_sub	Pravne posledice ; privatnopravne i socijalnopravne posledice prestanka SFRJ i stvaranja SRJ
topic	Jugoslavija - sukcesija države - družbena kriza - pravna država - Zvezna republika Jugoslavija Auflösung (DE-588)4193468-4 gnd Staatensukzession (DE-588)4056621-3 gnd Rechtsfolge (DE-588)4193464-7 gnd
topic_facet	Jugoslavija - sukcesija države - družbena kriza - pravna država - Zvezna republika Jugoslavija Auflösung Staatensukzession Rechtsfolge Jugoslawien Föderative Republik Jugoslawien
url	http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015451006&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015451006&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA
work_keys_str_mv	AT rakicvodinelicvesna prestanaksfrjpravneposlediceprivatnopravneisocijalnopravneposlediceprestankasfrjistvaranjasrj AT rakicvodinelicvesna nestanaksfrj

Verfügbarkeit

Es ist kein Print-Exemplar vorhanden.

Fernleihe Bestellen Achtung: Nicht im THWS-Bestand! Inhaltsverzeichnis

MARC

Datensatz im Suchindex

Es ist kein Print-Exemplar vorhanden.

Ähnliche Einträge