A conditional obligation is a legal instrument designed to prevent participants in civil circulation from gaining any benefit without proper legal justification. The legislation prohibits unjust enrichment or saving of property at the expense of others. Let us further consider the specifics of the conflict of laws and substantive regulation of condicion obligations.
Relevance of the issue
The scientific study of conditional obligations is of particular practical importance for civilian circulation. The norms established by law are designed to protect the interests and rights of all participants in legal relations.
Article 1102 of the Civil Code stipulates that an entity that, without any reason fixed in regulatory enactments, has acquired or saved property at the expense of any other person, is obliged to return the respective values to their owner. Considering the definition of conditional obligation, we can say that it performs a protective function. It assumes that the acquirer must transfer to the injured party (creditor) all property unreasonably saved or obtained at the expense of the latter.
Institute specifics
The term “property” is used in the concept of conditional obligations. It should be considered in a broad sense. Property should be understood not only as things, but also cash, securities, and property rights.
Sufficient legal grounds for saving or acquiring values are legal facts - legal titles named in Article 8 of the Civil Code.
Features of the application of standards
The rules on condiction obligations in civil law are used regardless of the presence or absence of the will of the rich. The motives and reasons for enriching or saving values are also irrelevant. The objective objective result of actions, i.e., the very fact of unjustified enrichment, is taken into account mainly. In some cases, the subjective aspect can be taken into account. It matters when, in addition to the obligation to return the property, additional property sanctions are imposed on the person. It, in particular, about compensation for losses, as well as payment of interest in accordance with article 395 of the Civil Code.
Classification
A conditional obligation is a specific legal relationship. It always arises if unjustified enrichment or saving takes place. The classification of such situations can be carried out on various grounds. So, for example, depending on the method of acquiring property, there are:
- Unjust enrichment. Here we are talking about the fact that the subject - the acquirer - without legal grounds receives another's property by means of active actions. They can be expressed, for example, in the assignment of the undue: through the bank terminal, the account holder orders the issuance of funds within the balance, but due to an operational error, he is issued an amount exceeding the requested amount. Therefore, money received in excess of the balance will be unjust enrichment.
- Unreasonable savings. In this case, the subject of conditional obligations is enriched by the preservation of their money or other values. For example, a lease agreement is invalidated or not concluded, which the tenant does not know about. Accordingly, he continues to pay rent, from which the owner of the object covers utility costs, thereby saving - saving - his own funds.
Nuances
The peculiarity of the conditional obligation is that it can be used as an independent tool for protecting violated rights or in conjunction with other requirements aimed at protecting the interests and rights specified in article 1103 of the Civil Code. So, the injured party can count not only on the return of property and restoration of the original financial situation, but also on compensation for lost profits and payment of interest on the use of other people's property by virtue of the provisions of Art. 1107 of the Code.
Conflict and substantive regulation of condication obligations
The rules governing the rules of unjustified enrichment are very specific. Due to the volume of civil circulation, the diversity of legal relations that arise, the general order is not always applicable to a specific situation. Accordingly, conflicts (contradictions) of norms often take place.
In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 1103 of the Civil Code, the conditional obligation arises as part of the requirements for the return of the executed on invalid transactions (restitution rules). However, this is not possible in all situations. So, the rules on unjustified enrichment are not subject to application if the restitution ban is the consequence of the invalidity of the transaction.
By virtue of paragraph 2 of paragraph 1103 of the Civil Code, a conditional obligation arises in the event of the presentation and satisfaction of a vindication claim. In particular, it is about settlements between the applicant and the defendant under Art. 303 of the Code.
By virtue of paragraph 2 of Art. 1103 of the Civil Code, the rules on unjustified enrichment apply to requirements arising from contractual obligations. Examples are cases of "overpayment", shipment of surplus goods, as well as recognition of the agreement as not concluded.
The law provides for at least one more application of the rules governing condicion obligations. This case is fixed in 4 clause 1103 of the Civil Code. It is a matter of tort obligations, within which the victim has the right to demand from the causer of damage not only full compensation for the losses incurred, but also the amounts of unjustified enrichment received.
All these situations are enshrined in domestic law. Meanwhile, unjust enrichment can take place in the framework of international legal relations. Let us briefly consider which conflict bindings are used in condicational obligations regulated by international law.
According to general rules, the requirements arising from unjustified enrichment are regulated by the law of the country in which the property was acquired or saved without proper justification. But if the enrichment took place by virtue of other legal relations, then the obligation that arises is subject to the rules applicable to these specific legal relations. In addition, article 1223.1 of the Civil Code establishes that participants in non-contractual obligations have the right to subordinate them to any right of their choice. In this case, however, the rights of third parties must be respected, as well as peremptory norms of law and order regarding the relevant legal relationship.
Thus, the conflict-based regulation of condicion obligations in international practice depends on the category of these obligations. This provision follows from Art. 1221 Civil Code.
General procedure for returning valuables
Based on the provisions of Article 1104 of the Civil Code, unjust enrichment should be returned to the victim in kind. In this case, the documentation and accessories of the items received by the debtor are transferred.
The acquirer is responsible for any deterioration or shortage of property after he became aware or should have become aware of unjust enrichment. Responsibility before this point occurs only in the presence of gross negligence or intent.
As a rule, the return of values in kind is impossible due to various circumstances: the loss of a thing, loss, etc. Often the replacement of property by the debtor of the victim is not satisfied. In such situations, by virtue of Article 1105 of the Civil Code, the value of unreasonably saved or acquired values and possible losses of the victim are subject to compensation.
If the subject of enrichment is property law, the creditor may demand its restoration and collection of all amounts received by the debtor. For example, as a result of fraudulent actions in the register of shareholders, the record was changed. As a result, property was appropriated by another entity. In such a situation, the victim may demand the restoration of the record and recovery in his favor of the proceeds received by the violator.
By virtue of paragraph 1 of Article 1107 of the Civil Code, the owner of values or rights unreasonably acquired or saved by the debtor has the right to rely on the payment of income that the rich person has extracted or should have derived. Calculation is carried out from the moment when the victim found out or should have become aware of unjust enrichment. In accordance with paragraph 2 of the same norm, interest on the use of borrowed funds is accrued on a sum of money unjustifiably acquired or saved. At the same time, the rules of article 395 of the Civil Code apply.
Important point
If in the course of the trial it is revealed that the rich person is a bona fide purchaser, that is, he did not know / could not know about the unjustification of enrichment, then, by virtue of the provisions of Article 1108 of the Code, he may demand from the victim compensation for all expenses incurred in connection with with the maintenance and preservation of values. Calculation is made from the moment when the conditional obligation arose. In this case, the benefit received by the acquirer is counted against his claims.
Exceptions to the Rules
It should be said that far from in all cases, the subject of condicion obligations must return the property or the right, saved or acquired without sufficient reason. Such situations are enshrined in article 1109 of the Civil Code. These situations have an external resemblance to unjust enrichment, but do not coincide in content.
By virtue of clause 1, 2 1109 of the Civil Code, the amount of unjustified enrichment or other property transferred in fulfillment of obligations before the due date or after the statute of limitations is not refundable. In the first situation, there is a legal basis for the provision of values and, accordingly, enrichment. The fact is that by virtue of Article 315 of the Civil Code, early fulfillment of an obligation is permissible. In the second case, the expiration of the statute of limitations does not imply the termination of subjective law.
By virtue of clause 4 1109 of the Civil Code, property received from a subject who knew about the absence of an obligation or provided value for charity is not returned. In the first situation, the law protects the interests of a bona fide purchaser, and in the second, the rights of the donee. In both the first and second cases, the will of the person who transmitted the values is realized.
Property or money provided to a citizen beyond what was relied upon as a means of subsistence shall not be returned unless signs of dishonesty have been revealed in his actions and a counting error has been made. For example, a salary is accrued and paid at a higher rate, a large amount of a scholarship or pension is transferred, etc. A hardware error of a bank terminal, improper employee actions when crediting funds, etc. are not recognized as counting errors.
Conditional and tort obligations
These legal categories have much in common. Both tort and concession relations are obligatory, property, relative, protective and non-contractual.
A tort obligation, unlike a contractual obligation, arises only when a person’s absolute rights are violated. It is, in particular, about the right to life, to health, the inviolability of the home, etc. If the conditions of an existing obligation are not fulfilled, it is impossible to talk about a legal relationship. Consequently, the claim for compensation for harm will be carried out according to other rules. We can’t talk about the occurrence of a condensation obligation during enrichment due to a violation of the agreement of one of the parties.
Features of the protection of goods
The nature of the values protected within the framework of tort relations does not imply the discretion of the participants in establishing the conditions for the onset of responsibility, as well as its size. Their regulation is carried out by peremptory norms. They do not provide for the freedom of persons in determining the conditions, size and grounds for liability, as may be the case in case of non-performance of the contract. Subjects of the conditional obligation also cannot influence the volume of their obligations and rights by concluding an agreement. They are exclusively subject to the norms of Chapter 60 of the Civil Code.
The role of guilt in obligations
Some lawyers rightly point out that if a benefit is diminished in the form of unjustified appropriation of property, the violator inflicts losses on the victim and, at the same time, is unreasonably enriched. Of course, if the unlawful actions of a person have led to an increase or saving of the values of the debtor, civil law relations arising in this connection will have signs of concession obligations. Subjects and objects of legal relations can be different. However, if the acquirer is to blame for the increase in property mass, one should speak about tort obligations, since it is guilt that is an additional sign pointing to them. Requirements for their implementation are considered in the framework of the norms of Chapter 59 of the Civil Code. As regards the provisions of chap. 60 of the Code, then to such relations they apply subsidiary.
Protection of the rights of victims solely on the basis of the norms of Chapter 60, probably, in some cases could lead to a larger increase in their property sphere. For example, the amount of values returned under a conditional obligation is not dependent on the absence or presence of fault of the victim, the property status of the purchaser of goods, as provided for in article 1083 of the Civil Code, which regulates the amount of compensation for harm.
Meanwhile, the apparent simplicity of the protection of rights can cause losses to the applicant, since there is a likelihood of a denial of the claim in connection with the wrong choice of method of protection. The plaintiff must first determine the category of legal relations. In accordance with this, one should choose the method of protecting one's rights.
Criteria for distinguishing legal relations
First of all, it must be emphasized once again that in the absence of harm to the victim and when the fact of unjustified saving due to his property was established between the parties, there is certainly a conditional relationship.
All signs of tort and concession obligations can be divided into indirect and basic. The latter are used to determine the nature of a particular relationship. Indirect features serve to control the quality of this definition, since none of them in the absence of the main features can be considered a criterion of differentiation.
Taking into account the protective role of obligations, first of all, the main distinguishing features should be considered. The difference between the obligations is reflected, firstly, in the grounds for their occurrence. The obligation to compensate for the harm appears in the presence of an offense - a tort. Unjustified enrichment, in turn, can be based on various legal facts. They can be expressed both in lawful and illegal actions.
Except in cases stipulated by law, tort obligations always arise if the offender is at fault. If it is absent, then there is a conditional relationship. If the enriched subject caused damage to the victim by his dishonest actions, the provisions of Chapter 60 of the Civil Code apply to such legal relations to the extent not regulated by the rules on compensation for harm.
This approach is confirmed by the fact that the legislation provides for a different amount of compensation in the framework of tort and conditional obligations. So, according to article 1064 of the Civil Code, the causer of damage must fully compensate the damage. By virtue of Art. 1107 of the Code, the acquirer only compensates for the profit that he received from the moment he became aware of the unreasonableness of his enrichment.
conclusions
Both obligations - tort and conditional - are protective and serve to restore violated subjective rights. But in the first case, the direct actions of the offender are recognized as unlawful, and in the second, their result.