{"title":"ABGB 的概念","authors":"Jan Kabát","doi":"10.14712/2464689x.2023.51","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This contribution focuses on the development of the concept of the precarium from the beginning of its codification in the ABGB to the present day, focusing more closely on two historically established interpretations: the first adopted by Antonín Randa and developed by his student Josef Stupecký and the second adopted by the Austrian civilian Josef von Schey. Historically, these conceptions came into conflict in our territory during the recodification of the ABGB in interwar Czechoslovakia which is why the contribution discusses the development of the precarium also within the framework of the so-called Draft Civil Codes, all considering contemporary Austrian and Czechoslovak case-law. Finally, the contribution provides a concept in the form of contemporary Austrian law and its concept of precarium which is also relevant in the light of the fact that the ABGB provision on precarium has remained unchanged since 1811.","PeriodicalId":386369,"journal":{"name":"PRÁVNĚHISTORICKÉ STUDIE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pojetí výprosy podle ABGB\",\"authors\":\"Jan Kabát\",\"doi\":\"10.14712/2464689x.2023.51\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This contribution focuses on the development of the concept of the precarium from the beginning of its codification in the ABGB to the present day, focusing more closely on two historically established interpretations: the first adopted by Antonín Randa and developed by his student Josef Stupecký and the second adopted by the Austrian civilian Josef von Schey. Historically, these conceptions came into conflict in our territory during the recodification of the ABGB in interwar Czechoslovakia which is why the contribution discusses the development of the precarium also within the framework of the so-called Draft Civil Codes, all considering contemporary Austrian and Czechoslovak case-law. Finally, the contribution provides a concept in the form of contemporary Austrian law and its concept of precarium which is also relevant in the light of the fact that the ABGB provision on precarium has remained unchanged since 1811.\",\"PeriodicalId\":386369,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PRÁVNĚHISTORICKÉ STUDIE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PRÁVNĚHISTORICKÉ STUDIE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14712/2464689x.2023.51\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PRÁVNĚHISTORICKÉ STUDIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14712/2464689x.2023.51","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
这篇论文集中讨论了从开始编纂《捷克民法典》到现在的前置词概念的发展,并更密切地关注两种历史上确立的解释:第一种是由 Antonín Randa 采用并由其学生 Josef Stupecký 发展的解释,第二种是由奥地利平民 Josef von Schey 采用的解释。从历史上看,在战时捷克斯洛伐克重新编纂《民法典》期间,这些概念在我们的领土上发生了冲突,这就是为什么本论文还在所谓的《民法典草案》框架内讨论了前置词的发展,所有这些都考虑到了当代奥地利和捷克斯洛伐克的判例法。最后,该论文以当代奥地利法律及其预保金概念的形式提供了一个概念,鉴于《奥地利民法典》关于预保金的规定自 1811 年以来一直未变,该概念也具有相关性。
This contribution focuses on the development of the concept of the precarium from the beginning of its codification in the ABGB to the present day, focusing more closely on two historically established interpretations: the first adopted by Antonín Randa and developed by his student Josef Stupecký and the second adopted by the Austrian civilian Josef von Schey. Historically, these conceptions came into conflict in our territory during the recodification of the ABGB in interwar Czechoslovakia which is why the contribution discusses the development of the precarium also within the framework of the so-called Draft Civil Codes, all considering contemporary Austrian and Czechoslovak case-law. Finally, the contribution provides a concept in the form of contemporary Austrian law and its concept of precarium which is also relevant in the light of the fact that the ABGB provision on precarium has remained unchanged since 1811.