Publication: La obligación de entregar la cosa a dos o más personas diversas conforme al artículo 1096 CC
Loading...
Date
2019-01
Authors
Díaz-Bautista Cremades, Adolfo Antonio
item.page.secondaryauthor
item.page.director
Publisher
Iustel
publication.page.editor
publication.page.department
DOI
item.page.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Description
© 2019 Iustel (PORTALDERECHO S. A.). This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
This document is the Published, version of a Published Work that appeared in final form in e-Legal History Review.
Abstract
El artículo 1096 del Código Civil, en su último párrafo prevé la responsabilidad por caso fortuito del deudor que se constituye en mora o se encuentre obligado a entregar la misma cosa a dos o más personas, lo cual significa -a sensu contrario- que cuando el deudor de cosa cierta no incurra en mora ni esté obligado frente a varios acreedores, responderá sólo por dolo o culpa. La exégesis del artículo no resulta sencilla dentro de nuestro sistema de transmisión de la propiedad mediante título y modo. La explicación se encuentra, según nuestra opinión, en el proyecto de código civil de García Goyena, de cuyo artículo 1006 se tomó este inciso (con un posible error ortográfico) y en el aparente conflicto entre los principios res perit domino y periculum est emptoris. El análisis de ambos principios en las fuentes romanas nos permitirá establecer su alcance y significado habciéndolos compatibles en nuestro Derecho. -------------------
The last paragraph of the article 1096 of the Civil Code provides for liability for casus fortuitus for the debtor who incurs default or is obliged to deliver the same certain thing to two or more persons, which means -a sensu contrario- that if the debtor of a certain thing does not incur default nor be bound by several creditors, he will only answer for fraud or fault. The exegesis of the article is not simple within our system of transfer of ownership. The explanation is, in our opinion, in the draft of the civil code of García Goyena, from whose article 1006 this subsection was taken (with a possible orthographic error) and in the apparent conflict between the principles res perit domino and periculum est emptoris. The analysis of both principles in Roman sources will allow us to establish their scope and meaning, making them compatible in our Law.
The last paragraph of the article 1096 of the Civil Code provides for liability for casus fortuitus for the debtor who incurs default or is obliged to deliver the same certain thing to two or more persons, which means -a sensu contrario- that if the debtor of a certain thing does not incur default nor be bound by several creditors, he will only answer for fraud or fault. The exegesis of the article is not simple within our system of transfer of ownership. The explanation is, in our opinion, in the draft of the civil code of García Goyena, from whose article 1006 this subsection was taken (with a possible orthographic error) and in the apparent conflict between the principles res perit domino and periculum est emptoris. The analysis of both principles in Roman sources will allow us to establish their scope and meaning, making them compatible in our Law.
publication.page.subject
Citation
e-Legal History Review, 2019, N. 29
item.page.embargo
Collections
Ir a Estadísticas
Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/