A Right as an Object of Civil Law Relations in the Context of Digital Environment and Economy of Shared Consumption
https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.111.2.086-093
Abstract
At the moment, social and economic conditions of social development focus on shared consumption, which raises new issues of the legal regime of property rights, namely, rights (claims), options, digital rights, uncertificated and paperless securities.
Uncertificated and paperless securities and digital rights have become an important stage in the information revolution, but their legal regime is ambiguous and undefined.
An optional design was provided back in 2008 under the Concept of Development of Civil Legislation of the Russian Federation. Subsequently, it was included in the draft federal law on amendments to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Based on some provisions of the draft law, the Federal Law of March 8, 2015, on Amendments to Part One of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in Art. 429.2 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation set forth the option to make a contract and, in Art. 429.3 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, an option agreement was set forth.
In the legal doctrine, the spread of ownership to property rights as “incorporeal things” caused a critical response. The legal regime of these objects in the context of specific legal regulation and judicial interpretation is ambiguous.
The paper analyses the concept, legal nature, qualifying features of property rights, makes a proposal to introduce a unified legal regime in relation to these objects.
Uncertificated and paperless securities and digital rights have become an important stage in the information revolution, but their legal regime is ambiguous and undefined.
An optional design was provided back in 2008 under the Concept of Development of Civil Legislation of the Russian Federation. Subsequently, it was included in the draft federal law on amendments to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Based on some provisions of the draft law, the Federal Law of March 8, 2015, on Amendments to Part One of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in Art. 429.2 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation set forth the option to make a contract and, in Art. 429.3 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, an option agreement was set forth.
In the legal doctrine, the spread of ownership to property rights as “incorporeal things” caused a critical response. The legal regime of these objects in the context of specific legal regulation and judicial interpretation is ambiguous.
The paper analyses the concept, legal nature, qualifying features of property rights, makes a proposal to introduce a unified legal regime in relation to these objects.
Keywords
collective use of goods and services,
legal regime,
option,
option contract,
option agreement,
offer,
contract,
agreement,
preliminary contract,
non-gratuitous nature,
property right,
powers
Supporting agencies: The reported study was funded by RFBR according to the research project № 18-29-16054
About the Author
E. B. Poduzova
Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, the Department of Civil Law, Associate Professor, the Department of Notary
ul. Sadovaya-Kudrinskaya, d. 9, Moscow, Russia, 125993
References
1. Ajnetdinov R. H. Proizvodnye cennye bumagi v grazhdanskom prave Rossii : dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk. — M., 2013.
2. Belov V. A. Bezdokumentarnye cennye bumagi. — M. : YurInfoR, 2003.
3. Bojcov S. M. Pravovaya priroda bezdokumentarnyh cennyh bumag // Leningradskij yuridicheskij zhurnal. — 2015. — № 2.
4. Bychkov A. Posrednichestvo pri okazanii yuridicheskih uslug: praktika, riski, perspektivy // Novaya buhgalteriya. — 2016. — № 9.
5. Vasilevskaya L. Yu. Token kak novyj ob"ekt grazhdanskih prav: problemy yuridicheskoj kvalifikacii cifrovogo prava // Aktual’nye problemy rossijskogo prava. — 2019. — № 5. — S. 111—119.
6. Vasilevskaya L. Yu. Cifrovye prava kak novyj ob"ekt grazhdanskih prav: problemy yuridicheskoj kvalifikacii // Hozyajstvo i pravo. — 2019. — № 5.
7. Vasilevskaya L. Yu. Elektronnaya forma sdelok v usloviyah razvitiya cifrovyh tekhnologij: problemy opredeleniya i tolkovaniya // Hozyajstvo i pravo. — 2019. — № 9.
8. Efimova L. G. Pravovye problemy beznalichnyh deneg // Hozyajstvo i pravo. — 1997. — № 2.
9. Ivanov A. A. Biznes-agregatory i pravo // Zakon. — 2017. — № 5.
10. Ivanova E. V. Derivativy. Forvard, f’yuchers, opcion, svop. Ekonomiko-pravovaya kvalifikaciya. — M. : Os’-89, 2007.
11. Korporativnoe pravo : uchebnyj kurs / otv. red. I. S. Shitkina. — M. : Statut, 2018. — T. 2 .
12. Molotnikov A. E., Arhipov E. V. Social’nye seti i kompanii-agregatory: pravovye aspekty deyatel’nosti // Predprinimatel’skoe pravo. — 2017. — № 4.
13. Murzin D. V. Cennye bumagi — bestelesnye veshchi. Pravovye problemy sovremennoj teorii cennyh bumag. — M., 1998.
14. Reshetina E. N. K voprosu o pravovoj prirode bezdokumentarnyh cennyh bumag // Zhurnal rossijskogo prava. — 2003. — № 7.
15. Savel’ev A. I. Elektronnaya kommerciya v Rossii i za rubezhom: pravovoe regulirovanie. — M. : Statut, 2016.
16. Stepanov D. I. Voprosy teorii i praktiki emissionnyh cennyh bumag // Hozyajstvo i pravo. — 2002. — № 3.
17. Suhanov E. A. Veshchnoe pravo : nauchno-poznavatel’nyj ocherk. — M. : Statut, 2017.
18. Cherepahin B. B. Yuridicheskaya priroda vekselya i Polozhenie o vekselyah 1922 goda // Pravo i zhizn’. — 1922. — Kn. 9—10.
19. Chesalina O. V. Rabota na osnove internet-platform (crowdwork i work on demand via apps) kak vyzov trudovomu i social’nomu pravu // Trudovoe pravo v Rossii i za rubezhom. — 2017. — № 1.
20. Yuldashbaeva L. R. Pravovoe regulirovanie oborota emissionnyh cennyh bumag (akcij, obligacij). — M., 1999.
21. Bheemaiah K. The Blockchain Alternative. — California : Apress, 2016.
22. De Stefano V. The rise of the «just-in-time workforce»: On-demand work, crowdwork and labour protection in the «gig-economy» // Conditions of work and employment. Series No. 71. — Geneva : ILO, 2016. P. 1. — URL: http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---travail/documents/publication/wcms_443267.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 31 oktyabrya 2019 g.).
23. Edelman B. G. Whither Uber? Competitive Dynamics in Transportation Networks // Competition Policy International. — Spring/Autumn 2015.
24. Geradin D. Should Uber Be Allowed to Compete in Europe? And If so How? // Forthcoming in Competition Policy International. 2015. — George Mason Legal Studies Research Paper № LS 15-11. — George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper № 15—29.
25. Rauch D. E., Schleicher D. Like Uber, but for Local Governmental Policy: The Future of Local Regulation of the Sharing Economy // George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper. — 2015. — № 15—01.
26. Rogers B. The Social Costs of Uber // University of Chicago Law Review Dialogue. — 2015. — № 28.
Review
For citations:
Poduzova E.B. A Right as an Object of Civil Law Relations in the Context of Digital Environment and Economy of Shared Consumption. Actual Problems of Russian Law. 2020;15(2):86-93. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.111.2.086-093
Views:
626
Email this article 