... legea 71/2011- art. 107 -"Dispozitiile art. 1.271 din Codul civil privitoare la impreviziune se aplica numai contractelor incheiate dupa intrarea in vigoare a Codului civil. "
cat de important si cat de restrictiv poate fi, totusi, acest articol 107 din legea 71/2011?
... pentru ca oricum, clauza de impreviziune se prezuma ca exista in orice contract...
... si mai sunt si alte principii incalcate: imbogatirea injusta, abuzul de drepturi, specula, limitele impuse de conventiile morale si de ordine publica...
... tot in argentina ("fascinantul studiu de caz argentina") gasim aplicarea teoriei impreviziunii (
cu ajustari in ambele sensuri) in probleme de natura financiara (datorii/creante -inclusiv denominate in moneda straina- US dollar) cu mult inaintea (si in in lipsa) reglemetarii exprese a impreviziunii in codul civil (1968)...
"The valorist paradigm became widely used in Latin America in order to readjust contract
values that were affected by inflation.
Argentine civil courts, in effect, applied the valorist paradigm under the heading of “theory of imprevision” to uphold revaluation of depreciated debts as a result of inflationary processes.
In the 1960s, courts abandoned nominalism by leveling up the nominal sums set in contracts, fixing periodic performances or postponed execution with a view to neutralize the distorting effects of inflation on the economic bases of those contracts.
Thus, courts held that all contracts must be presumed to contain an implicit rebus sic stantibus clause.
On the basis of this principle, courts ruled that values set in contracts can be judicially recast if new circumstances emerge that were not foreseeable and that substantially alter the financial equation of the bargain.
Applying this doctrine, courts increased the nominal value of obligations fixed in contracts
when this value was depreciated by inflation, or decreased it when performance
became excessively burdensome for one of the parties as a consequence of the dollar denomination of the contract obligations or the application of an index clause.
The Argentine Supreme Court upheld revaluation in Pribluda de Hurevich v. Hernández and Provincia de Sante Fe v. Carlos Aurelio Nicchi.
Justice José Francisco Bidau explained that “in the face of the persistence of this phenomenon [inflation] and the extremes it reaches at present, it is not possible to maintain legal principles that have become fictitious.” Following Hernández and Nicchi, various rulings held that revaluation was a way to protect the right to property and to maintain the economic value of debts.
The 1968 reform of the Civil Code expressly laid down the theory of imprevision.
The Supreme Court later endorsed the valorist paradigm in three 1976 decisions, declaring that failure to update the amounts of defaulted obligations would amount to a violation of the
right to property."
Horacio Spector- "Don’t Cry for Me Argentina: Economic Crises and the Restructuring of Financial Property"
pag. 31-32 (in format pfd)
... sau pag. 10-11 de aici
[ link extern ]
... scuze lipsa traducerii:slap: