LL.D. / The purpose and main thrust of this thesis are to consider the nature, aim(s), operation and extent of restitutio in integrum as a remedy where consensus is obtained improperly, where iustus error is successfully raised and where a contract is cancelled as a result of breach of contract. A historical analysis indicates that restitutio in integrum in Roman law is shrouded in uncertainty. Restitutio in integrum was an extraordinary and equitable remedy aimed both at nullification of a valid transaction and the reciprocal restoration of performance rendered. It was granted by the praetor in cases of negotia stricti iuris where no other remedy was available to the aggrieved party, inter alia where metus or dolus led to the conclusion of a contract. Complete reciprocal restoration was the aim and a requirement of the remedy. In cases of negotia bonne fidei, the remedies which were available in respect of specific contracts, dealt with the situation. As the distinction between negotia bonne fidei and stricti iuris faded, the need for an extraordinary remedy lapsed. There is, indeed, a possibility that restitutio in integrum no longer functioned as a separate remedy in the Justinian codification. One would not have expected restitutio in integrum to be available as a separate and extraordinary remedy in the Roman Dutch law of contract due to the fact that the principles underlying the negotia bone fidei won the thy after the reception of the Roman law in Europe. Such availability in that system can be attributed to the fusion which took place between the Roman concept of restitutio in integrum and the indigenous concept of "relief". It can be argued that the Roman Dutch remedy of restitutio in integrum arose from the obligations which the dictates of the bona fides imposed on the parties, whilst considerations underpinning enrichment liability were also raised. Restitutio in integrum was, however, still viewed as an equitable remedy and constituted a single remedy with the double aim of nullification and reciprocal restoration. Unlike Roman Dutch law, modern South African law distinguishes between rescission and restitution. This makes it possible to consider separate bases for rescission and restitution. It is submitted that the competence to rescind a contract in the case of improperly obtained consensus arises from the dictates of the bona fides which the law imposes on parties in the antecedent negotiation and performance of contracts. Problems in respect of rescission must be viewed against the background of rescission as a contractual remedy governed by the dictates of good faith. Subsequent to rescission, no causa retinendi exists in respect of the performance (or its value) which is to be restored and an enrichment remedy is at hand. As far as restitution as a component of restitutio in integrum is concerned, it demonstrates all the characteristics attributed to a developed enrichment action and it can be viewed as such pending the development of a general enrichment action. Restitutio in integrum was not applied in our common law in the instances of mistake and the cancellation of contracts by virtue of breach of contract. Our courts probably referred to restitutio in integrum in those circumstances as a result of the paucity of other authority offered by our common law sources. It is argued that the reliance theory underpins the iustus error doctrine. In the case of iustus error no consensus exists and no reasonable reliance is created by the other party which deserves protection. As no contract exists, performance which has been rendered can be recovered with an enrichment remedy. The "technical concept" of restitutio in integrum also has no role to play in the case of breach of contract. It is submitted that the competence to cancel a contract by virtue of breach of contract also arises from the dictates of good faith. Subsequent to cancellation, no causa retinendi exists in respect of the performance (or its value) which is to be restored and the reciprocal duties to restore are enrichment based. The conclusion is reached that the general principles of our law of obligations have developed and evolved sufficiently to enable us to do without an extraordinary remedy such as restitutio in integrum. The adoption of the suggestions made will place the South African law on a modern basis comparable to the approaches existing in related legal systems which are also reviewed.

This study is of two remedies that are available in South African law: orders of restitutio in integrum, and specific performance. The study demonstrates that, by treating these remedies as legal topics in their own right, a greater understanding emerges of their inherent characteristics, the role that they play in the law, and of the particular circumstances in which these remedies are available. An order of restitutio in integrum performs an important and unique function in South African law. The fundamental realisation is that it is a remedy in terms of which the courts exercise an extraordinary and discretionary power, and nullify ab initio legal transactions, or the legal consequences of events, which were previously perfectly valid and enforceable at law. Because of the extraordinary nature of this remedy, the circumstances in which it is available are limited by the requirement that iusta causa must exist to justify nullification. Further, before the remedy is available, the person seeking relief must have suffered loss or prejudice as a result of the event complained of. Finally, a mutual restoration of benefits received by the persons involved is required. The nature and effect of orders of restitutio in integrum, and the essential elements which determine the availability of the remedy, enable it to be distinguished from, and contrasted with, other remedies in South African law. An order of specific performance is available in South African law, at the option of a plaintiff, to enforce the actual performance of contractual undertakings. The remedy is appropriate to enforce positive undertakings, as well as acts of restraint. For the remedy to be available, it is firstly necessary that a contractual obligation be proved to exist. Secondly, performance of that obligation must be due. Thirdly, the performance sought must not in fact have already been rendered. These elements determine the availability of the remedy in particular factual circumstances, such as in cases involving pre-emptive rights. The nature and characteristics of the remedy are determined by principles of South African, and not English law. The remedy is available as of right in South African law, but subject to a discretionary power of a court to refuse to order specific performance. / KMBT_363 / Adobe Acrobat 9.53 Paper Capture Plug-in

Šiame magistro baigiamajame darbe autorė analizuoja svarbiausią neturtinės žalos atlyginimo instituto aspektą – kompensacijos dydį. Tyrimas pradedamas „neturtinės žalos“ sąvokos analize, kuri atskleidžia prieštaringą šio instituto prigimtį, taip pat aptariami kiti probleminiai aspektai, tokie kaip piniginio įvertinimo galimybė, santykis su restitutio in integrum principu, istorinė evoliucija, galimybė unifikuoti šį institutą Europos Sąjungos lygiu. Antrajame skyriuje nagrinėjamas neturtinės žalos atlyginimas kaip procesas, ieškoma atsakymo į klausimus, kas galėtų vertinti neturtinės žalos dydį, kokie būdai ir kriterijai padėtų tai padaryti teisingai. Analizuojamas neturtinės žalos dydžio įrodinėjimo aspektas, aptariama prezumcijos įtvirtinimo galimybė, paneigiama įstatymų leidėjo galimybė riboti neturtinės žalos dydį, nustatant maksimalius limitus. Trečiasis šio magistro baigiamojo darbo skyrius yra skirtas Lietuvos teismų praktikos analizei: atskleidžiamos pagrindinės problemos, pateikiami nevienareikšmiško vertinimo pavyzdžiai, galimi problemų sprendimo variantai. / The matter in question of the current master thesis is the most important aspect of compensation of non pecuniary damage - the size of compensation. The master thesis begins at the analysis of concept of "non pecuniary damage", which displays controversial nature of current institute, as well as other problematic aspects are being analysed, such as possibility of pecuniary valuation, relation to restitutio in integrum principle, historic evolution and opportunities of unification of the institute in the European Union. In the second chapter the compensation of non pecuniary damage as a process is being analysed, problems of subjects, which are able to value the size of compensation of non pecuniary damage, as well as methods and criterion that may assist, are being examined. The proving of size of non pecuniary damage is being analysed, possibility of fixing a presumption is being disputed as well as the right of a legislator to limit the size of non pecuniary damage while fixing maximum limits is being denied. The third chapter is based on practice of Lithuanian courts: pricipal problems are being highlighted as well as the examples of ambiguous estimation and the possible solutions are given. / Autor der Arbeit analisiert die wichtigste Frage des Ersatzes des immateriellen Schadens – die Hőhe der Genugtuung. Im ersten Abschnitt der Arbeit beschäftigt sich mit der Konzeption des immateriellen Schadens, die die widerspruchsvolle Natur dieses Institutes zeigt, verhandelt man die andere Probleme: Geld als Mittel der Genugtuung, das Verhaltnis mit dem Prinzip restitutio integrum, historische Entwicklung, die Mőglichkeit der Vereinheitlichung in der EU. In dem zweiten Abschnitt wird der Ersatz des immateriellen Schadens wie der Prozess behandelt. Es handelt um die Subjekten, Weise und Kriterien der Feststellung der Hőhe des immateriellen Schadens, die gerechte Genugtuung garantieren kőnnte. Auch wird das Problem der Beweisung analisiert, behandelt man die Mőglichkeit der Presumtion, widerlegt man die Fähigkeit des Gesetzgebers, die Hőhe des immateriellen Schadens zu beschränken. Im dritten Abschnitt werden einzelne Probleme der Feststellung der Hőhe des immateriellen Schadens in der Rechtsprechung analisiert: einige Beispiele der unterschiedlichen Bemessung werden vorgebracht, die mőglichen Lősungen gezeigt.

Magistro baigiamajame darbe nagrinėjami neturtinės žalos atlyginimo objektai bei jų teoriniai ir praktiniai skirtumai Lietuvos, Italijos, Didžiosios Britanijos, JAV, Vokietijos bei Prancūzijos teisinėse sistemose. Bandoma parodyti, kad teisė į neturtinės žalos atlyginimą, pažeidus asmens neturtines vertybes tiek bipolinėse, tiek singuliarinėse valstybėse yra plečiama, grindžiant žmogaus teisių doktrinos idėja ir siekiu įgyvendinti visiško žalos atlyginimo principą, nors, kita vertus, pripažįstama, jog pilnai pritaikyti restitutio in integrum neturtinės žalos atlyginimo srityje dėl prarastos vertybės specifiškumo nėra įmanoma. Pagrindinis darbo tikslas yra išnagrinėti neturtinės žalos atlyginimo objektus, jų raidos bei taikymo teisminėje praktikoje tendencijas, atskleisti kiekvieno objekto pažeidimo atveju keliamus reikalavimus ir taikomus neturtinės žalos atlyginimo apribojimus. Todėl lyginamojo, istorinio, loginio, sisteminio bei kitų metodų pagalba analizuojama pasirinktų šalių teisinė patirtis, bandoma įžvelgti ne tik panašumų, bet ir atskleisti tam tikrus skirtumus, sutinkamus teisės į neturtinės žalos atlyginimą įgyvendinimo procese. Darbą sudaro įvadas, keturi skyriai, išvados, literatūros sąrašas bei santrauka. Pirmojo skyriaus tikslas yra atskleisti tam tikrus teorinius neturtinės žalos atlyginimo aspektus, aptariant neturtinės žalos atlyginimo funkcijas bei sąvoką, įtvirtintą įvairių valstybių teisės aktuose. Antrojoje darbo dalyje yra apibūdinami neturtinės žalos... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / The objects of non-pecuniary damage and their theoretical and practical differencies in Lithunian, Italian, Great Britain, American, German and French legal systems are analysed in this Master work. It is attempted to show, that a right to non-pecuniary damage redress after infringement of non-economical values is being expanded both - in singular and bipolar countries, as a result of the concept of human rights doctrine and aspiration to entirely implement the principle of damage compensation, though accepting the impossibility of restitutio in integrum in the field of non-pecuniary damage because of the specificity of the lost value. The primary aim of this work is to explore the objects of non-pecuniary damage, the trends of their development and application in judicial practice, to reveal the requirements, raised in every case of the infringement of the object, and the restrictions applied to the redress of non-pecuniary damage. Therefore, with the help of comparative, historical, logical, systemic and other methods, the experience of chosen countries is analysed, trying to envisage not only some similarities, but also to reveal the diferrencies, applied in the implementation process of the right to non-pecuniary damage. The work consists of introduction, four chapters, conclusions, the list of literature and summary. Tha aim of the first chapter is to disclose particular theoretical aspects of non-pecuniary damage, such as the functions of non-pecuniary damage redress... [to full text]

Civilinės atsakomybės esmę nusako jos tikslai. Autorius darbe nagrinėja visas civilinės atsakomybės funkcijas, jų sudedamuosius elementus, pasireiškimą nacionalinėje ir užsienio valstybių doktrinoje ir praktikoje, probleminius klausimus. Atlikus tyrimą autorius daro išvadą, kad pagrindinės civilinės atsakomybės funkcijos yra kompensacija ir prevencija, nors pastaroji yra mažesnės reikšmės. Civilinės atsakomybės pobūdis lemia kompensacinės funkcijos neginčijamą svarbą žalos atlyginimo procese. Šios funkcijos esmę išreiškia visiško nuostolių atlyginimo principas. Visiškai atlyginti nuostolius – tai grąžinti nukentėjusįjį į tokią turtinę padėtį, kokia būtų nepadarius žalos. Kartu šis principas reiškia, kad iš žalos padariusio asmens negalima išieškoti daugiau, nei nukentėjusysis patyrė žalos, nes tai reikštų nepagrįstą nukentėjusiojo praturtėjimą. Darbe autorius taip pat aprašo, kaip kompensavimo funkcija pasireiškia Lietuvos teisinėje sistemoje ir koks funkcijos pasireiškimo būdas yra dažniausiai pasitaikantis praktikoje. Darbe analizuojama ir pabaigoje padaroma išvada, kad visiško nuostolių atlyginimo principas negali būti absoliutus. Visa apimtimi civilinės atsakomybės kompensavimo funkcija negali pasireikšti atlyginant neturtinę žalą, esant ribotai civilinei atsakomybei, o taip pat atsižvelgiant į būtinumą taikyti sąžiningumo, protingumo ir teisingumo principus. Prevencija pasireiškia dvejopai. Pirma, a priori, t.y. teisės pažeidėjas žinodamas apie gresiančią atsakomybę... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / The essence of the civil liability is expressed by its goals. The paper deals with the functions of the civil liability, theirs constitutive elements, their manifestation in national and foreign countries doctrine and practise, problem issues. At the end of the research the author makes conclusion that the main functions of the civil liability is the compensation and the prevention though the last is of a secondary importance. The nature of the civil liability determines undisputable significance of the compensatory function in the loss indemnifying process. The essence of the compensatory function is expressing by the principle of the compensation of damages in full. To compensate damages in full – is return the aggrieved person in such property state that would be if there are not occurred damages. Together with above mentioned such principle means that from the person by whom the damage was caused can not be recover more than the aggrieved person has incurred losses because otherwise the aggrieved person shall be considered as in the position of the unjust enrichment. The author in the paper also describes how the compensatory function manifests itself in the Lithuanian legal system and which nature of such manifesting is mostly occurred in practise. In the paper is analysing and in the end is making by the author a conclusion that the principle of the compensation of damages in full cannot be absolute. The compensatory function fully cannot be expressed either in... [to full text]