IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROVISIONS ON TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION OF THE CONTRACT IN THE NEW EDITION OF THE CIVIL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Rubrics: CIVIL AND FAMILY LAW. BUSINESS LAW
Authors:
Type:
Article
Pages:
from 0
to 0
Status:
Published
Received:
18.11.2016
Accepted:
18.11.2016
Published:
18.11.2016
Language:
Russian
Keywords:
modification of the contract, termination of the contract, significant change in circumstances, rejection of the contract (execution of the contract), the interpretation of contract terms by the court, the fee for a unilateral refusal to execute obligations.
Abstract (English):
The article is devoted to the analysis of practical application of provisions of Chapter 29 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation which regulating the issues of modification and termination of the contract by courts. The relevance of such analysis was caused by the introduction of the new edition of Chapter 29 of the Civil Code as well as the practice of its application by courts resulting to increasing of the number of lawsuits concerning disputes on modification and termination of the contract caused by the economic crisis of the past two years. In addition, the number of lawsuits on refusal of one of the contractors from the contract in cases stipulated by the contract considering by arbitration courts was also increased. On the basis of the analysis of judicial practice the author has made a conclusion that if parties to a contract want to provide in the contract the possibility of cancellation of the agreement for any reason other than provided in the Civil Code, other laws or other legal acts, such grounds have to be expressly listed in the agreement, or the contract has to contain wording about the possibility of termination of the contract on any other grounds. The author has noted the necessity of unification of the approaches to the qualification of the sum which has to be paid in a case of the early termination of the contract as it provided by the clause 3, article 310 of the Civil Code for the unilateral refusal of execution of obligations regardless of how the specified amount named in the contract.
The article is devoted to the analysis of practical application of provisions of Chapter 29 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation which regulating the issues of modification and termination of the contract by courts. The relevance of such analysis was caused by the introduction of the new edition of Chapter 29 of the Civil Code as well as the practice of its application by courts resulting to increasing of the number of lawsuits concerning disputes on modification and termination of the contract caused by the economic crisis of the past two years. In addition, the number of lawsuits on refusal of one of the contractors from the contract in cases stipulated by the contract considering by arbitration courts was also increased. On the basis of the analysis of judicial practice the author has made a conclusion that if parties to a contract want to provide in the contract the possibility of cancellation of the agreement for any reason other than provided in the Civil Code, other laws or other legal acts, such grounds have to be expressly listed in the agreement, or the contract has to contain wording about the possibility of termination of the contract on any other grounds. The author has noted the necessity of unification of the approaches to the qualification of the sum which has to be paid in a case of the early termination of the contract as it provided by the clause 3, article 310 of the Civil Code for the unilateral refusal of execution of obligations regardless of how the specified amount named in the contract.
Keywords:
modification of the contract, termination of the contract, significant change in circumstances, rejection of the contract (execution of the contract), the interpretation of contract terms by the court, the fee for a unilateral refusal to execute obligations.
modification of the contract, termination of the contract, significant change in circumstances, rejection of the contract (execution of the contract), the interpretation of contract terms by the court, the fee for a unilateral refusal to execute obligations.
1. «Nashi bedy ne ot zakonodatel´stva i ne ot ego nedostatka, a ot togo, chto my primenyaem normy nedostatochno razumno». Zakon. 2015. № 11.
2. Braginskiy M. I., Vitryanskiy V. V. Dogovornoe pravo: obshchie polozheniya. M., 2011.
3. Koni A. F. Nravstvennye nachala v ugolovnom protsesse (obshchie cherty sudebnoy etiki). Izbrannye trudy i rechi / sost. I. V. Potapchuk. Tula, 2000.
