Abstract
The growing interconnectedness of global economies helped to spread the effects of the financial crisis to many different areas of human life. Among many other things, it also effected the civil law relationships. In this paper, the author introduced several areas of Czech civil law which had to reflect the circumstances brought about by the financial crisis. This paper investigates the “change of circumstances” which may lead to termination or alteration of an existing legal relationship according to Czech law. Considering the possibilities that law offers to the contractual parties heavily affected by financial crisis, the author reminds us that the effects of financial crisis on private-law relationships should be considered especially with solidarity in mind.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Decision of the ECJ, of March 21, 2013, RWE Vertrieb AG proti Verbraucherzentrale Nordrhein-Westfalen eV., C-92/11 or the decision of ECJ of April 26, 2012, Nemzeti Fogyasztóvédelmi Hatóság v. Invitel Távközlési Zrt., C-472/10.
- 2.
The decision of the Supreme Court No 21 Cdo 5205/2007 of December 8, 2009, available: www.nsoud.cz; http://www.nsoud.cz/Judikatura/judikatura_ns.nsf/WebSearch/EFA70C129418AC1AC1257A4E0065BC95?openDocument&Highlight=0,21,cdo,5205/2007.
- 3.
Eliáš (2009).
- 4.
Compare: Hulmák et al. (2014).
- 5.
Eliáš et al. (2012).
- 6.
Impossibilium nulla est obligatio (Digesta 50,17,185).
- 7.
Compare: the Sec. 7 and 8 CESL; ‘SME’ is small or medium-sized enterprise.
- 8.
Decision of the Supreme Court of March 28, 2012, No 33 Cdo 884/2010).
- 9.
Compare: the decisions of May 4, 1999, Himpurna California Energy Ltd. v. PT Perusahaan Listruik Negara, XXV Y.B. Intʼl Comm. Arb. 13.
- 10.
- 11.
CMS Gas Transmission Company v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case no ARB/01/8, of May 12, 2005; Scafom International BV v. Lorraine Tubes S.A.S., 2009.
- 12.
Compare: Králík M, Lavický P (2012).
- 13.
Decision of the Supreme Court of June 23, 2010, No 23 Cdo 1991/2008.
- 14.
Decision of the Supreme Court of May 30, 2012, No 25 Cdo 4850/2009.
- 15.
Decision of the Supreme Court of April 10, 2007, No 32 Odo 795/2006.
- 16.
Decision of the Supreme Court of June 26, 2012, No 32 Cdo 2762/2010.
- 17.
Decision of the Supreme Court of October 20, 2011, No 30 Cdo 3460/2009.
- 18.
Decision of the Supreme Court of September 23, 2009, No 33 Cdo 1787/2007.
- 19.
Decision of the Supreme Court of January 25, 2012, No 32 Cdo 3334/2010.
- 20.
Decision of the Supreme Court of January 8, 2003, No 29 Odo 690/2001.
- 21.
Now, the same rule is included in the Sec. 2913 para 2 of NCC.
- 22.
Decision of the Supreme Court of January 25, 2012, No 23 Cdo 3066/2010.
References
Brunner, C. 2009. Force Majeure and Hardship under General Contract Principles: Exemption for Non-Performance in International Arbitration. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.
Eliáš, K. 2009. Clausula rebus sic stantibus (Význam změny okolností pro trvání obligace ex contractu). Obchodněprávní revue, No 6.
Eliáš, K., et al. 2012. Nový občanský zákoník s aktualizovanou důvodovou zprávou, 1st ed. Ostrava: Sagit.
Girsberger, D., and P. Zapolskis. 2012. Fundamental alteration of the contractual equilibrium under hardship exemption. Jurisprudencija 1: 125–129.
Hulmák, et al. 2014. Občanský zákoník V. Závazkové právo. Obecná část (§ 1721–2054), 1. ed. Praha: C.H. Beck, p. 223–235.
Králík, M., and P. Lavický. 2012. Doložka rebus sic stantibus. Soudní rozhledy, No 10.
List of Cases
CMS Gas Transmission Company v. The Argentine Republic, ICSID Case no ARB/01/8, of May 12, 2005; Scafom International BV v. Lorraine Tubes S.A.S., 2009.
ECJ of April 26, 2012, Nemzeti Fogyasztóvédelmi Hatóság v. Invitel Távközlési Zrt., C-472/10.
ECJ, of March 21, 2013, RWE Vertrieb AG proti Verbraucherzentrale Nordrhein-Westfalen eV., C-92/11.
Himpurna California Energy Ltd. v. PT Perusahaan Listruik Negara, XXV Y.B. Intʼl Comm. Arb. of 13 May 4, 1999.
Supreme Court No 21 Cdo 5205/2007 of December 8, 2009, available: www.nsoud.cz; http://www.nsoud.cz/Judikatura/judikatura_ns.nsf/WebSearch/EFA70C129418AC1AC1257A4E0065BC95?openDocument&Highlight=0,21,cdo,5205/2007
Supreme Court of April 10, 2007, No 32 Odo 795/2006.
Supreme Court of January 25, 2012, No 23 Cdo 3066/2010.
Supreme Court of January 25, 2012, No 32 Cdo 3334/2010.
Supreme Court of January 8, 2003, No 29 Odo 690/2001.
Supreme Court of June 23, 2010, No 23 Cdo 1991/2008.
Supreme Court of June 26, 2012, No 32 Cdo 2762/2010.
Supreme Court of March 28, 2012, No 33 Cdo 884/2010.
Supreme Court of May 30, 2012, No 25 Cdo 4850/2009.
Supreme Court of October 20, 2011, No 30 Cdo 3460/2009.
Supreme Court of September 23, 2009, No 33 Cdo 1787/2007.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Selucká, M. (2016). Elimination of the Impacts of Financial Crisis on Legal Relationships According to Czech Private Law. In: Başoğlu, B. (eds) The Effects of Financial Crises on the Binding Force of Contracts - Renegotiation, Rescission or Revision. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 17. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27256-6_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27256-6_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-27254-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-27256-6
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)