TRANSFER OF PROPERTY

Full text of the paper:

Proceedings of the Faculty of Law, Novi Sad

2025, vol. LIX no. 1, p. 139-162

working language: Serbian

Review paper

347.72:347.42

doi:10.5937/zrpfns59-55168

Author:

 
Dijana Marković Bajalović

UNION University Faculty of Law

dijana.markovicbajalovic@pravnifakultet.edu.rs

ORCID ID: 0000-0001-6887-1310

Summary:

 
The topic of property transfer is neglected in domestic legal theory, although in practice it is of great importance, especially in economic relations. Businesses and entrepreneurs often sell or otherwise transfer a part of their assets that make up a functional or organized whole of things and rights to another person. In domestic legislation, the transfer of property is regulated by Art. 452 of the Law on Obligations – ZOO within the framework of the debt accession institute. In judicial practice, the aforementioned legal provision has often served as a legal basis for establishing the responsibility of the acquirer of a property entity for the obligations of the transferor. Problems in the application of Art. 452 ZOO arise because the law does not define the concept of property entity, nor the conditions under which the acquirer should be responsible for the obligations of the transferor. Courts extensively interpret the concept of property entity, which leads to the expansion of the field of application of Art. 452 ZOO. The problem is further complicated by the fact that the domestic legal theory does not agree on the meaning of the term property, and this dispute is also reflected in the legal decisions and positions of the courts. The aim of this paper is to provide an answer to what was the intention of the legislator when formulating the norm from Art. 452 ZOO, and then to point out the direction that should be taken in order for the above provision to be correctly applied and, as the author suggests, amended.

Keywords: