PRAVNA PRIRODA ROKA IZ ČLANA 515. ZOO: IZMEĐU SAVESNOSTI I FORMALIZMA

Danijela Despotović; Maja Kovačević; Rašević Rašević

doi:10.51738/kpolisa.2026.1r.ddmkzr

Authors

Danijela Despotović Univerzitet Privredna akademija, Novi Sad, Srbija Pravni fakultet za privredu i pravosuđe u Novom Sadu https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5336-1801
Maja Kovačević Univerzitet Privredna akademija, Novi Sad, Srbija Fakultet za ekonomiju i inžinjerski menadžment u Novom Sadu https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6902-3794
Rašević Rašević Colege of Business Economics and Entrepreneurship, Belgrade, Serbia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1424-3041

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51738/kpolisa.2026.1r.ddmkzr

Keywords:

eviction, legal defect, contractual liability, preclusion, good faith and fair dealing

Abstract

The legal nature of the subjective time limit set forth in Article 515 of the Law on Obligations of the Republic of Serbia, which regulates the buyer’s right in cases of eviction, raises a number of theoretical and practical issues. Although prevailing legal doctrine and case law regard this time limit as preclusive, such interpretation becomes problematic in situations where the seller was aware of a third party’s right and failed to disclose it. The paper particularly examines the limits of contractual exclusion of the seller’s liability, viewed through the lens of the principle of good faith and fair dealing. By analyzing relevant judicial decisions and comparative legal solutions in German, French, Anglo-American, and international commercial law (CISG), the study argues for a clearer legislative determination of the nature of the time limit under Article 515 and for the introduction of exceptions in cases of the seller’s bad faith. It concludes that such a reform would enhance legal certainty, safeguard contractual equilibrium, and align Serbian contract law with modern European standards.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arbitral Award SCh-4318. (1994, June 15). Arbitral Tribunal of the Vienna International Arbitral Centre. Available at: https://cisgw3.law.pace.edu/cases/940615a4.html

Bundesgerichtshof [BGh]. (1999, March 10). Urteil VIII ZR 204/98. Available at: https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Aktenzeichen=VIII+ZR+204/98

Babić, I. (2008). Ugovori građanskog prava, drugo izmenjeno izdanje [Civil Law Contracts, Second Revised Edition]. Pravni fakultet Univerziteta Union i Službeni glasnik, Beograd.

Cour de cassation, troisième chambre civile. (2008, January 30). Arrêt n° 06-21.145. Available at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/juri/id/JURITEXT000018073976

CISG Advisory Council. (2020, October 30). Opinion No. 17: Limitation and Exclusion Clauses under the CISG. Available at: https://cisgac.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/CISG_Advisory_Council_Opinion_No_17.pdf

Ćosić, R. (1988). Zakon o obligacionim odnosima sa aktuelnom sudskom praksom i registrom pojmova [Law on Obligations with Current Case Law and an Index of Terms]. Poslovni biro, Beograd, 216-217.

DiMatteo, L. A. (2014). International Sales Law: A Global Cha lenge. Cambridge University Press.

DiMatteo, A., Dhooge L.J., Greene S., Maurer V.G, Pagnattaro M.A. (2005). International Sales Law, A Critical Analysis of CISG Jurisprudence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Džipković, K. (2022). Vansudska evikcija [Extrajudicial Eviction]. Pravo i privreda, 60 (1), 161–181. https://doi.org/10.55836/PiP_22108A

Gorenc, V. (1993). Trgovačko pravo – Ugovori [ Commercial Law: Contracts ]. Školska knjiga, Zagreb.

Interfoto Picture Library Ltd v Stiletto Visual Programmes Ltd [1989] 1 QB 433 (Court of Appeal, England and Wales). Available at: https://www.bail i.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1987/6.html

Karanikić Mirić, M. (2024). Obligaciono pravo ,treće izdanje [Law of Obligations, Third Edition]. Službeni glasnik. Beograd.

Jovićić, K. (2018). Ugovoro prodaji pokretnih stvari u Švajcarskoj, u: Nikolić. O. (ur.) Uvod u parvo Švjacarske. [The Contract of Sale of Movable Goods in Switzerland, in: Nikolić, O. (ed.), Introduction to Swiss Law]. Institut za uporedno pravou Beogradu, 256.

Pajtić, B., Radovanović, S., & Dudaš, A. (2018). Obligaciono pravo [Law of Obligations]. Novi Sad: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Novom Sadu – Centar za izdavačku delatnost.

Schwenzer, I. (2016). In I. Schwenzer (Ed.), Schlechtriem & Schwenzer: Commentary on the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods (CISG) (4th ed., p. 656). Oxford University Press.

Slakoper, Z. (2007). Odgovornost za pravne nedostatke u Zakonu o obveznim odnosima i izabranim pravnim poretcima [Liability for Legal Defects under the Law on Obligations and Selected Legal Systems]. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Rijeci, 28(1), 1-45.

United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), Art. 7. (1980). Available at: https://uncitral.un.org/en/texts/salegoods/conventions/sale_of_goods

von Bar C., Clive E., Schulte-Nolke h. et al. (eds.) (2009). Principles, Definitions and Model Rules of European Private Law Draft Common Frame of Reference, Outline Edition. Minich: Selier, 282.

Odluka Vrhovni kasacioni suda [ОVS]. [Decision of the Supreme Court of Cassation], Presuda Rev 5683/2020 od 7. aprila 2022. godine. Beograd.

Odluka Vrhovnog suda Srbije [ОVS]. [Decision of the Supreme Court of Serbia], Ržr– Presuda Rev. 742/06 od 21. februara 2007. In Veljković, D. (Ed.), Zbirka sudske prakse iz obligacionog prava [Case Law Colection on the Law of Obligations], (pp. 176-180). Beograd: Izdavač.

Narodna skupština Republike Srbije [Narodna skupština]. (1978). Zakon o obligacionim odnosima [Law on Obligational Relations]. Sl. list SFRJ, br. 29/78, 39/85, 45/89 - odluka USJ i 57/89, "Sl. List SRJ", br. 31/93, "Sl. list SCG", br. 1/2003 - Ustavna povelja i "Sl. glasnik RS", br. 18/2020. https://www.parlament.gov.rs/upload/archive/files/cir/pdf/predlozi_zakona/2019/2883-19.pdf

Šobot, S. Fišer. (2017). Odgovornost prodavca za pravne nedostatke u pravu Republike Srbije i pravu Evropske unije [Se ler’s Liability for Legal Defects in Serbian Law and European Union Law]. Pravni život, 66(9), 33-47.

Wi liams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co., 350 F.2d 445 (D.C. Cir. 1965). Available at: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appe late-courts/F2/350/445/256059/