Critique of the Provisions of the Russian Civil Code on the Termination of Tenancy Agreements in a Comparative Legal Perspective

Ekaterina S. Terdi, Mikhail V. Aseev
{"title":"Critique of the Provisions of the Russian Civil Code on the Termination of Tenancy Agreements in a Comparative Legal Perspective","authors":"Ekaterina S. Terdi, Mikhail V. Aseev","doi":"10.37399/issn2072-909x.2023.10.72-81","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Imperatively established by the Russian civil legislation judicial procedure of termination of the residential tenancy agreement by the landlord is criticized in the article. Evaluation of its effectiveness for the formulation of the proposals for the development of the art. 687 of the Russian Civil Code is the purpose of the study. Its objective is comparative analysis of the legal regulation of the termination of the residential tenancy agreement by the landlord under the Russian Civil Code, legislation of 4 republican (Texas, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming) and 4 democratic (Washington, New Mexico, New York, Illinois) American states with taking into account legal regulation of relevant relations in Germany and France. The purpose and the objective of the study determine the predominant use of the method of comparative legal analysis. Two alternative models of reform of the art. 687 of the Russian Civil Code, whose provisions are recognized as a relic of Soviet law, ineffective in a market economy, were offered by the authors. The experience of Germany and France is an argument in favor of so-called regulatory model of reform that allows the unilateral termination of the residential tenancy agreement by the landlord only on the reasons provided by law (not by the agreement). An analysis of the legislation of both republican and democratic American states permits characterizing it as a less restrictive to the principle of freedom of contract, since it allows stating in the agreement the reasons for its unilateral termination by the landlord. However, it excludes the right of the parties of the residential tenancy agreement to provide to the landlord the right of its unmotivated unilateral termination. Unlike legislation of the USA, this right might be provided to the landlord under so-called dispositive model of reform, proposed by the authors as the closest to the actual situation in the Russian market of residential tenancy. It is assumed that the condition for realization of this right must be a notice to the counterparty at least 1 month in advance. Within this model right of unmotivated unilateral termination of the agreement may be provided to the landlord only if the same right is granted to the tenant. One of the advantages of this model is that its implementation will eliminate due to lack of demand the widespread practice of stating in the residential tenancy agreement restricting the legal capacity of citizens and therefore void conditions. It will contribute to the unloading of the Russian judicial system by eliminating disputes over these conditions.","PeriodicalId":487513,"journal":{"name":"Российское правосудие","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Российское правосудие","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37399/issn2072-909x.2023.10.72-81","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Imperatively established by the Russian civil legislation judicial procedure of termination of the residential tenancy agreement by the landlord is criticized in the article. Evaluation of its effectiveness for the formulation of the proposals for the development of the art. 687 of the Russian Civil Code is the purpose of the study. Its objective is comparative analysis of the legal regulation of the termination of the residential tenancy agreement by the landlord under the Russian Civil Code, legislation of 4 republican (Texas, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming) and 4 democratic (Washington, New Mexico, New York, Illinois) American states with taking into account legal regulation of relevant relations in Germany and France. The purpose and the objective of the study determine the predominant use of the method of comparative legal analysis. Two alternative models of reform of the art. 687 of the Russian Civil Code, whose provisions are recognized as a relic of Soviet law, ineffective in a market economy, were offered by the authors. The experience of Germany and France is an argument in favor of so-called regulatory model of reform that allows the unilateral termination of the residential tenancy agreement by the landlord only on the reasons provided by law (not by the agreement). An analysis of the legislation of both republican and democratic American states permits characterizing it as a less restrictive to the principle of freedom of contract, since it allows stating in the agreement the reasons for its unilateral termination by the landlord. However, it excludes the right of the parties of the residential tenancy agreement to provide to the landlord the right of its unmotivated unilateral termination. Unlike legislation of the USA, this right might be provided to the landlord under so-called dispositive model of reform, proposed by the authors as the closest to the actual situation in the Russian market of residential tenancy. It is assumed that the condition for realization of this right must be a notice to the counterparty at least 1 month in advance. Within this model right of unmotivated unilateral termination of the agreement may be provided to the landlord only if the same right is granted to the tenant. One of the advantages of this model is that its implementation will eliminate due to lack of demand the widespread practice of stating in the residential tenancy agreement restricting the legal capacity of citizens and therefore void conditions. It will contribute to the unloading of the Russian judicial system by eliminating disputes over these conditions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较法学视角下的俄罗斯民法典关于租赁协议终止条款批判
文章对俄罗斯民事立法中强制规定的房东解除住宅租赁协议的司法程序进行了批判。评估其有效性,以制订艺术发展建议。本文以俄罗斯民法典第687条为研究对象。其目的是比较分析俄罗斯民法典、美国4个共和党州(德克萨斯州、爱达荷州、犹他州、怀俄明州)和4个民主党州(华盛顿州、新墨西哥州、纽约州、伊利诺伊州)对业主终止住宅租赁协议的法律规定,并考虑德国和法国相关关系的法律规定。研究的目的和目的决定了比较法律分析方法的主要使用。艺术改革的两种不同模式。《俄罗斯民法典》第687条的规定被认为是苏联法律的遗留物,在市场经济中是无效的。德国和法国的经验是支持所谓的监管改革模式的论据,即房东仅凭法律规定的理由(而不是协议规定的理由)单方面终止住宅租赁协议。对美国共和党和民主党各州的立法进行分析,可以将其定性为对契约自由原则的限制较少,因为它允许在协议中说明房东单方面终止合同的原因。然而,它排除了住宅租赁协议当事人向房东提供无动机单方面终止其权利的权利。与美国的立法不同,这一权利可以在所谓的处置式改革模式下提供给房东,作者认为这是最接近俄罗斯住宅租赁市场实际情况的。假设实现该权利的条件必须是至少提前1个月通知对方。在这种模式下,房东只有在授予租客同样的权利的情况下才有权单方面无动机地终止协议。这种模式的优点之一是,它的实施将消除由于需求不足而在住宅租赁协议中规定限制公民法律行为能力的普遍做法,从而消除无效条件。通过消除对这些条件的争议,它将有助于卸载俄罗斯司法系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Features of Recovery of Losses from Shadow Management in the Framework of a Bankruptcy Case Modernization of Criminal Legislation in the Context of Criminalization of Responsibility for Social and Domestic Violence Termination Indemnity is a Universal Way of Cease of Obligations in Russian Civil Law On Responsibility for the Dissemination of Knowingly False Information and Discrediting the Use of the Armed Forces: A Comparative Analysis Actual Issues of Realization of the Right to Defense at the Stage of Initiation of a Criminal Case
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1