Search

The subject of our research is the process of selecting a supplier of material resources to machine-building enterprises. The aim of this work is to identify factors that improve the process of supplier selection of material resources to large enterprises. Testing this model is made on the example of the “KRANEKS” machinebuilding enterprise. The methodological basis of the scientific research is work in the fields of systems analysis, management accounting, and econometrics. As a result of the research, a methodology and estimation algorithm of suppliers was developed, as well as a hierarchical model of fuzzy inference to supplier evaluation. These developments are mainly aimed at supporting decision making in choosing the best provider for a machine-building enterprise. These developments mainly focused on decision support in choosing the best provider for an engineering enterprise whose list of material resources runs into the thousands. They are aimed at improving the efficiency of administrative decisions in the supplier selection process of machine-building enterprises and improving the work process of their purchasing departments. Przedmiotem badań jest proces wyboru dostawców materiałów w przedsiębiorstwach sektora budowy maszyn. Celem jest identyfikacja czynników ulepszających ten proces w dużych przedsiębiorstwach. Zbudowany model przetestowano na przedsiębiorstwie „KRANEKS”. Podstawy teoretyczno-metodologiczne pracy zawierają się w obrębie analizy systemów, rachunkowości zarządczej i ekonometrii. W rezultacie stworzone metodologię oraz algorytm wyboru dostawcy oraz hierarchiczny model wnioskowania rozmytego dla oceny dostawców. Narzędzia te dobrze nadają się do wspierania decyzji o wyborze dostawców w przedsiębiorstwie sektora budowy maszyn. W istocie mogą one wspierać decyzje w każdym przedsiębiorstwie produkcyjnym, które zgłasza zapotrzebowanie na dostawy licznych materiałów. Narzędzia te mają poprawiać efektywność decyzji administracyjnych oraz wspierać działy zakupów tego rodzaju przedsiębiorstw.

Zakon o kmetijskih zemljiščih in Zakon o gozdovih določata posebnosti v zvezi s predkupnimi pravicami in postopkom prodaje kmetijskih zemljišč, zaščitenih kmetij in gozdov, ki promet urejajo drugače, kot ga urejajo tradicionalni instituti civilnega prava. Predpisa določata kategorije in vrstne rede predkupnih upravičencev za nakup pa tudi prednostno pravico do zakupa kmetijskih zemljišč, zaščitenih kmetij in gozdov. Določitev zakonite predkupne pravice pomeni poseg v razpolagalno upravičenje lastnika oziroma v pravico do izbire sopogodbenika in s tem v ustavno zagotovljeno pravico do zasebne lastnine. Pri določitvi analiziranih zakonitih predkupnih pravic gre za relativno blage omejitve, ki so utemeljene v javnem interesu, sorazmerne in zato dopustne. Ne glede na to, da zakonodajalec v primeru prodaje določenih vrst gozdov na prvo mesto postavi osebo javnega prava, pri kmetijskih zemljiščih pa je oseba javnega prava zadnji v vrsti predkupnih upravičencev, sta obe predkupni pravici določeni v javnem interesu. Jedro problema je analiza in primerjava kategorij in vrstnih redov prednostnih upravičencev, ki pokaže, da med vrstnimi redi in kategorijami prednostnih upravičencev do prodaje in zakupa kmetijskega zemljišča in gozda obstajajo določene razlike, katerih ratio je zdaj bolj, zdaj manj jasen. Med dilemami in neustrezno urejenimi položaji, ki so ob analizi sodne prakse izpostavljeni v tej nalogi, velja izpostaviti položaj solastnika kot predkupnega upravičenca v primeru prodaje gozda. V tem primeru ga lahko po stališču teorije štejemo za mejaša. Z razlago, ki je analogna sodni praksi v primeru predkupne pravice občine, pa bi solastnika lahko šteli celo za prvega predkupnega upravičenca. V nalogi opozarjamo tudi na nekatere nejasnosti, ki nastanejo ob smiselni uporabi predpisov o prodaji kmetijskega zemljišča za primere prodaj gozda in v primeru zakupa. Končno obravnavamo še postopkovne posebnosti uveljavljanja prednostnih pravic ter sankcije, ki nastopijo ob kršitvi analiziranih pravil, ki so v ničnosti zavezovalnega pravnega posla in oviri za overitev podpisa na zemljiškoknjižnem dovolilu. Agricultural Land Act and Act on Forests regulates the specificities regarding the transactions of agricultural land and pre-emptive rights. Legislation defines the pre-emptive rights to buy and priority rights to lease agricultural areas, protected farms and forests, by determining the categories and ranks of priority rights holders. Pre-emptive rights and priority rights to lease agricultural land and forests disables the owner to choose the counter party and therefore interfere with the constitutional guaranteed right to private property. The interference is justified in the public interest. Pre-emptive rights are recognised as relatively minor restrictions, which are proportionate with its object and therefore admissible. Analysed pre-emptive rights are determined in the public interest, regardless the fact that in the case of agricultural land, the public entity is recognised as the last pre-emptive holder. The aim of this paper is to analyse and compare the categories and ranks of holders of pre-emptive rights and priority rights to lease agricultural land and forests. There are certain divergences between the ranks and the categories of pre-emptive holders of agricultural land and forest. The divergences are not consistently justified, e.g. the position of the co-proprietor of forests, which is treated differently compared to the position of the co-proprietor of agricultural land without legitimate or reasonable justification. Therefore, the theory stated that co-proprietor could be considered as the first neighbour. Moreover, the co-proprietor could be considered as first pre-emptive buyer, according to the case law in the case of conflict between municipality as pre-emptive buyer and co-proprietor as pre-emptive buyer according to the general rules. There are some ambiguities pointed out in this paper that are associated with mutatis mutandis use of the rules, governing the transactions of agricultural land to the transactions of forests. Finally, we address the procedural questions and sanctions that should be applied in violation of the analysed rules. In addition to administrative protection, in particular, the nullity of the contract and the obstacle to the notarisation of the signature on the clausula intabulandi.

Савремено друштво почива на принципима тржишне економије коју, у правилу, прати убрзан процес производње и промета, те јачање економске самосталности привредних субјеката. Отуда је и разумљива потреба ових субјеката да своје привредне циљеве остварују на што ефикаснији и економичнији начин. Један од њих је и прибављање употребне вредности одређеног добра путем закупа, при чему се, као најраспрострањенији правно - економски облик закупа, јавља закуп пословних зграда и просторија. Овај облигациони однос одликује низ специфичних елемената што га, спрам закупа у општем смислу, чини односом дифферентиа специфица. Управо та посебна обележја уговора о закупу пословних зграда и просторија, посматрана кроз етапе његовог рађања, стварања права и обавеза његових учесника и, најзад, специфицитет његовог гашења, чине окосницу овог истраживања. Истраживање обухвата седам тематских целина, при чему резултати упоредноправне анализе овог института у евроконтиненталним правним системима (свим државама бивше Југославије, Руској Федерацији, Швајцарској, Аустрији, Немачкој, Француској и Италији), те у англосаксонском правном кругу (Великој Британији и Сједињеним Америчким Државама) прожимају целокупну материју дисертације. Пружање научно утемељених и актуелном судском праксом поткрепљених аргумената за ново и модерно нормативно уређење закупа пословних просторија у правним системима Републике Српске и Републике Србије, по узору на савремене тенденције у упоредном праву, представља основни мотив истраживања. У исти мах, сврха овог научног подухвата исцрпљује се и у тежњи да се потенцијалним субјектима уговора о закупу пословних зграда и просторија пружи могућност за прецизним утаначењем уговорних воља (правних и економских интереса) како би се предупредили судски спорови или макар допринело бржем и ефикаснијем решавању истих, те како би се стране мотивисале за поштовање своје уговорне дисциплине. Savremeno društvo počiva na principima tržišne ekonomije koju, u pravilu, prati ubrzan proces proizvodnje i prometa, te jačanje ekonomske samostalnosti privrednih subjekata. Otuda je i razumljiva potreba ovih subjekata da svoje privredne ciljeve ostvaruju na što efikasniji i ekonomičniji način. Jedan od njih je i pribavljanje upotrebne vrednosti određenog dobra putem zakupa, pri čemu se, kao najrasprostranjeniji pravno - ekonomski oblik zakupa, javlja zakup poslovnih zgrada i prostorija. Ovaj obligacioni odnos odlikuje niz specifičnih elemenata što ga, spram zakupa u opštem smislu, čini odnosom differentia specifica. Upravo ta posebna obeležja ugovora o zakupu poslovnih zgrada i prostorija, posmatrana kroz etape njegovog rađanja, stvaranja prava i obaveza njegovih učesnika i, najzad, specificitet njegovog gašenja, čine okosnicu ovog istraživanja. Istraživanje obuhvata sedam tematskih celina, pri čemu rezultati uporednopravne analize ovog instituta u evrokontinentalnim pravnim sistemima (svim državama bivše Jugoslavije, Ruskoj Federaciji, Švajcarskoj, Austriji, Nemačkoj, Francuskoj i Italiji), te u anglosaksonskom pravnom krugu (Velikoj Britaniji i Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama) prožimaju celokupnu materiju disertacije. Pružanje naučno utemeljenih i aktuelnom sudskom praksom potkrepljenih argumenata za novo i moderno normativno uređenje zakupa poslovnih prostorija u pravnim sistemima Republike Srpske i Republike Srbije, po uzoru na savremene tendencije u uporednom pravu, predstavlja osnovni motiv istraživanja. U isti mah, svrha ovog naučnog poduhvata iscrpljuje se i u težnji da se potencijalnim subjektima ugovora o zakupu poslovnih zgrada i prostorija pruži mogućnost za preciznim utanačenjem ugovornih volja (pravnih i ekonomskih interesa) kako bi se predupredili sudski sporovi ili makar doprinelo bržem i efikasnijem rešavanju istih, te kako bi se strane motivisale za poštovanje svoje ugovorne discipline. Modern society is based on the principles of market economy, which, as a rule, follows an accelerated process of production and trade, and strengthening the economic independence of economic entities. Hence there is a clean need these entities to achieve their business objectives in the most efficient and economical way. One of them is the acquiring use value for certain goods through lease, in which, as the most widely used legal - economic forms of lease, appears lease of commercial buildings and premises. This contractual relationship is characterized by a set of specific elements of it, towards the basic type of lease, seems relations differentia specifica. Just these special characteristics of the lease contract of commercial buildings and premises, seen through the stages of its genesis, the creation of rights and obligations of its participants, and finally, through the specificity of its termination, are the backbone of this research. Research includes seven thematic parts, whereby the results of the comparative analysis of this institute in the continental law systems (all countries of former Yugoslavia, the Russian Federation, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, France and Italy) and in common law jurisdictions (the UK and the United States) permeate the entire matter of the dissertation. Providing scientifically justified, a current jurisprudence substantiated arguments for a new and modern normative regulation of a lease of business premises in the legal systems of the Republic of Srpska and Republic of Serbia, modeled on contemporary trends in comparative law, is the basic motive of the research. At the same time, the purpose of this scientific project consists in striving to provide to potential subjects of the lease contract of commercial buildings an opportunity for precise contractual stipulations about legal and economic interests in order to prevent litigation, or at least contribute to a faster and more efficient resolution of the same, and to motivate the parties to respect their contractual discipline.

U radu se analiziraju pravne posljedice otvaranja stečajnog postupka u odnosu na sklapanje, raskid, otkaz ili odustanak od ugovora o zakupu i najmu nekretnina. Posebno se razmatra položaj stečajnog dužnika kao najmoprimca ili zakupnika te kao najmodavca ili zakupodavca kao i pravo stečajnog upravitelja na izbor nastavka, odustanka, raskida ili otkaza tih ugovora. Razmataju se odredbe Stečajnog i drugih zakona koji reguliraju materiju zakupa i najma nekretnina , a odnose se na ugovaratelja- stečajnog dužnika., This paper analyses the legal consequences of initiating insolvency proceedings with respect to entering into, cancellation, termination or withdrawal from a Real Property Lease or Rent Agreement. The position of the insolvency debtor as tenant or lessee, and as landlord or lessor, as well as the right of the insolvency administrator to choose to continue with, to withdraw from, to cancel or terminate such agreements are discussed herein. The provisions of the Insolvency Act and other acts are taken into consideration, since such acts regulate real property lease and rent issues, and which refer to the contractor - insolvency debtor., Dieser Artikel analysiert die rechtlichen Konsequenzen der Einleitung von Insolvenzverfahren in Bezug auf das Eingehen, die Kündigung, die Aufl ösung oder den Rücktritt aus einem Pacht- oder Mietvertrag. Die Position des Insolvenzschuldners als Mieter oder Pachtnehmer und als Vermieter oder Pachtgeber sowie das Recht des Insolvenzverwalters mit diesen Verträgen fortzuführen, sie zurückzuziehen, aufzulösen oder beenden, werden hier diskutiert. Die Bestimmungen des Insolvenzgesetzes und anderer Handlungen werden in Betracht gezogen, da diese Handlungen Immobilienund Mietprobleme regeln und sich auf den Auftragnehmer - Insolvenzschuldner beziehen., Nel lavoro si analizzano le conseguenze giuridiche dell’apertura del procedimento fallimentare nei confronti della stipulazione, della risoluzione, dello scioglimento e della revoca dei contratti di affi tto e di locazione degli immobili. In particolare si disamina la posizione del debitore fallimentare nella veste di affi ttante o di affi ttuario e nella veste di locatore o conduttore. Ancora si esaminano i diritti del curatore fallimentare nell’espletamento dei poteri contrattuali con riferimento a tali contratti. Si analizzano le disposizioni della legge fallimentare e delle altre leggi che regolano la materia dell’affi tto e della locazione degli immobili con riguardo alla parte contrattuale che sia anche debitore fallimentare.

Tema ovog završnog rada je raspolaganje poslovnim prostorima u vlasništvu javnih tijela. U ovom završnom radu izlagat će se o pojmu javnog tijela, te pojmu tijela jedinice lokalne i područne regionalne samouprave koje imaju na raspolaganju nekretnine u svom vlasništvu. U skladu s ovom temom posebno će biti definiran pojam poslovnog prostora, te raspolaganje i upravljanje nekretninama, a koja su posebno regulirana hrvatskim propisima. nadalje Zakonima je posebno određeno davanje u zakup i prodaja poslovnih prostora u vlasništvu javnih tijela, te su zakonskom regulativom predviđena ograničenja koja se odnose upravo na javna tijela, koja ne mogu slobodno raspolagati tim poslovnim prostorima. Kako imamo ograničenja tako imamo i uvjete kada je zakonski moguće odstupiti od javnog nadmetanja i raspolaganja po tržišnim cijenama. S toga će se u ovom radu obraditi i zakup i kupoprodaja poslovnih prostora u vlasništvu javnih tijela, te će se na kraju iznijeti zaključak do kojeg se došlo prikupljajući materijale za ovaj završni rad. The topic of this thesis is the management of business premises owned by public bodies. The final paper will present the concept of public bodies, and the concept of local and regional government bodies that have such properties in their possession. In line with this topic, the terms of office space and the disposal and management of the real estate will be defined, as regulated by the Croatian law. Furthermore, the laws specifically regulate leases and sales of commercial premises owned by the public bodies, and the restrictions related to public administration bodies, which cannot freely administer such business premises. Along with the restrictions, there are also the conditions under which it is legally possible to deviate from public tenders and administering at market prices. Therefore this paper will also discuss the leases and purchases and sales of the business premises owned by public authorities, and will eventually produce a conclusion reached by gathering the materials for this final work.

Veliki bosanski vojvoda Radoslav Pavlović jedan od područnih gospodara koji je obilježio bosansku srednjovjekovnu povijest I. polovice 15. stoljeća, svoju bogatu političku i gospodarsku aktivnost ostvaruje putem svojih odnosa s Dubrovčanima. Upravo će se u radu pratiti njegove gospodarske veze s Dubrovčanima na temelju kojih je ostvario velike novčane i robne prihode. Riječ je o trgovačkim poslovima, posebice prodaji olova, davanju carina u zakup kao i naplaćivanju carina, dobiti od uloženog novca pohranjenog u dubrovačku Komunu od prodaje dijela Konavala Dubrovniku. Ti odnosi ostvarivali su se preko Radoslavovih poslanika, poklisara, koji su u Dubrovniku uživali velik ugled i povjerenje. Uspješne gospodarske veze Radoslava Pavlovića s Dubrovčanima temeljile su se na predispozicijama koje su Pavlovići imali, primjerice posjedovali su važan rudnik kvalitetnog olova Olovo, kao i znatne carine u dubrovačkom zaleđu i na ušću Neretve te trgovačkim putovima koji su vodili u unutrašnjost, Bosnu, Srbiju, Ugarsku. Također, Pavlovići su imali i dio Konavala koje su Dubrovčani nastojali uključiti u planove svoga teritorijalnog širenja. Rudarski proizvodi u izvoznoj trgovini srednjovjekovne Bosne imaju važno mjesto, a upravo je bitno obilježje gospodarskog razvoja Dubrovnika od sredine 14. stoljeća razgranata posrednička trgovina rudarskim proizvodima srebrom i olovom iz Bosne i Srbije. Važno je da se u trgovinu bosanskim olovom, osim Dubrovčana, bosanskog kralja i feudalaca, kakav je i Radoslav Pavlović, o čijem se doprinosu u radu i govori, uključuju i domaći ljudi. Najveći dio bosanskog olova iz Dubrovnika odlazio je na strana tržišta, Italiju, Španjolsku, Tursku, a samo je manji dio služio za lokalne potrebe u Dubrovniku. Izvoz bosanskog olova tekao je i preko Venecije. I vojvoda Radoslav Pavlović, kao i ostali područni gospodari i kraljevi, davao je svoje carine u zakup, najčešće Dubrovčanima, poput olovske i drijevske carine, čije je četvrtine bio vlasnik. Dobivali su od zakupaca ugovoreni iznos zakupa, što im je osiguravalo dobit. Ovaj je bosanski vojvoda imao carine i u drugim svojim mjestima u koja su Dubrovčani dolazili sa svojom robom. Na svojim je područjima vojvoda Radoslav propisivao svoje odluke o carinama, provoznim, usputnim te carinama na samom trgu gdje se i prodavalo.

Veliki bosanski vojvoda Radoslav Pavlović, jedan od područnih gospodara koji je obilježio bosansku srednjovjekovnu povijest I. polovice 15. stoljeća, svoju bogatu političku i gospodarsku aktivnost ostvaruje putem svojih odnosa s Dubrovčanima. Upravo će se u radu pratiti njegove gospodarske veze s Dubrovčanima na temelju kojih je ostvario velike novčane i robne prihode. Riječ je o trgovačkim poslovima, posebice prodaji olova, davanju carina u zakup kao i naplaćivanju carina, dobiti od uloženog novca pohranjenog u dubrovačku Komunu od prodaje dijela Konavala Dubrovniku. Ti odnosi ostvarivali su se preko Radoslavovih poslanika, poklisara, koji su u Dubrovniku uživali velik ugled i povjerenje. Uspješne gospodarske veze Radoslava Pavlovića s Dubrovčanima temeljile su se na predispozicijama koje su Pavlovići imali, primjerice posjedovali su važan rudnik kvalitetnog olova Olovo, kao i znatne carine u dubrovačkom zaleđu i na ušću Neretve te trgovačkim putovima koji su vodili u unutrašnjost, Bosnu, Srbiju, Ugarsku. Također, Pavlovići su imali i dio Konavala koje su Dubrovčani nastojali uključiti u planove svoga teritorijalnog širenja. Rudarski proizvodi u izvoznoj trgovini srednjovjekovne Bosne imaju važno mjesto, a upravo je bitno obilježje gospodarskog razvoja Dubrovnika od sredine 14. stoljeća razgranata posrednička trgovina rudarskim proizvodima srebrom i olovom iz Bosne i Srbije. Važno je da se u trgovinu bosanskim olovom, osim Dubrovčana, bosanskoga kralja i feudalaca, kakav je i Radoslav Pavlović, o čijem se doprinosu u radu i govori, uključuju i domaći ljudi. Najveći dio bosanskog olova iz Dubrovnika odlazio je na strana tržišta, Italiju, Španjolsku, Tursku, a samo je manji dio služio za lokalne potrebe u Dubrovniku. Izvoz bosanskog olova tekao je i preko Venecije. I vojvoda Radoslav Pavlović, kao i ostali područni gospodari i kraljevi, davao je svoje carine u zakup, najčešće Dubrovčanima, poput olovske i drijevske carine, čije je četvrtine bio vlasnik. Dobivali su od zakupaca ugovoreni iznos zakupa, što im je osiguravalo dobit. Ovaj je bosanski vojvoda imao carine i u drugim svojim mjestima u koja su Dubrovčani dolazili sa svojom robom. Na svojim je područjima vojvoda Radoslav propisivao svoje odluke o carinama, provoznim, usputnim te carinama na samom trgu gdje se i prodavalo., The great Bosnian Duke Radoslav Pavlović, one of the regional masters who left his mark upon the Bosnian medieval history of the first half of the 15th century, achieved his prolific political and economic activity through his relations with the inhabitants of Dubrovnik. This paper deals with his economic relations with the inhabitants of Dubrovnik. These relations brought him great financial and retail income. These were trade enterprises, in particular trading lead, renting customs services as well as charging customs duties. The income from invested money was saved in the Dubrovnik Komuna which was gained by sale of part of Konavle to Dubrovnik. These relations were gained with the help of Radoslav’s commissioners, who were poklisars enjoying great trust and respect in Dubrovnik. The successful economic relations of Radoslav Pavlović with the inhabitants of Dubrovnik were based on the advantages that the Pavlović family had, such as possessing Olovo (Lead) which was a significant mine of quality of lead, as well as significant custom duties in the hinterland of Dubrovnik and the Neretva Estuary and the trade routes which lead inland, to Bosnia, Serbia and Hungary. Also, the Pavlovićs owned a part of Konavle which the Dubrovnik inhabitants tried to include into their plans of territorial spreading. Mining products held an important place in the export trade of medieval Bosnia, and the crucial feature of the economic growth of Dubrovnik from the mid 14th century was precisely this widespread intermediary trade of mining products, silver and lead, from Bosnia and Serbia. It’s significant that the local population was included in trading with Bosnian lead, not only the inhabitants of Dubrovnik and the Bosnian king and nobilities, as for example Radoslav Pavlović, whose contribution is the topic of this paper. The greatest part of Bosnian lead from Dubrovnik ended up in foreign markets, Italy, Spain or Turkey, and only a small portion served to satisfy the local needs of Dubrovnik. The export of Bosnian lead took place also through Venice. Both Duke Radoslav Pavlović, as well as the rest of the regional masters and kings, rented their customs, mostly to people from Dubrovnik, such as lead and driev customs, of which he owned a quarter. They received the amount of rent money agreed upon, which ensured them a stable profit. This Bosnian duke also owned customs in other places where people of Dubrovnik came to sell their goods. In regions under his command Duke Radoslav made decisions on customs; transport, transitional as well as the customs in the very square where trading took place.

V magistrski nalogi smo raziskali pravno ureditev zakupne pogodbe v Sloveniji ter pravno ureditev zakupne pogodbe v državah, ki so blizu Sloveniji in po katerih se slovensko pravo zgleduje v več pravnih ureditvah. Na slovenski zemlji so se do sprejema Zakona o obligacijskih razmerjih (ZOR) leta 1978 uporabljala pravila avstrijskega Občega državljanskega zakonika (ODZ) iz leta 1811. Zakon o obligacijskih razmerjih je uredil obligacijska razmerja in znotraj posebnega dela tudi zakupno pogodbo. Leta 2001 je določbe Zakona o obligacijskih razmerjih, ki se nanašajo na zakup, zamenjal danes veljavni Obligacijski zakonik (OZ), ki ureja pogodbe o prepustitvi pravice rabe in pod tem pojmom ureja dve vrsti imenskih, v zakonu urejenih pogodb o uporabi, najemno oziroma zakupno in posodbeno. Sedanji posebni predpisi o zakupu kmetijskih zemljišč izhajajo iz sedemdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja, ko je bil sprejet Zakon o kmetijskih zemljiščih, ki je pričel celoviteje urejati promet kmetijskih zemljišč, vključno z zakupom, tudi med lastniki in ne le med lastniki in t. i. družbenim sektorjem. Posebno ureditev zakupa je spremljal zemljiški maksimum, saj kmet ni smel preseči, tudi z zakupom kmetijskih zemljišč ne. Predpisi so dajali prednost zakupa kmetijskih zemljišč družbenemu sektorju (kmetijskim organizacijam) pred kmeti (individualnimi kmetijskimi proizvajalce). Prehod v družbeno ekonomski sistem, ki je zagotovil lastninsko pravico, uredil vračilo premoženja, ki je bilo podržavljeno s predpisi o agrarni reformi, nacionalizaciji in o zaplembah, ter odpravil zemljiški maksimum, je vplival na večjo aktualnost zakupa. Svoj delež so prispevala še aktualna gospodarska gibanja v kmetijstvu, ki obetajo preživetje le večjih kmetij in stagniranje ali celo propadanje manjših. Po odpravi zemljiškega maksimuma za posameznike in pravne osebe so vsa kmetijska gospodarstva, ne glede na pravno obliko (kmetje, podjetniki ali gospodarske družbe in druge pravne osebe), dobila možnost povečanja, in sicer z nakupom ali zakupom kmetijskih zemljišč. Kmetijska zemljišča so ob lastninskem preoblikovanju večinoma prešla v last države, ki je za gospodarjenje z njimi ustanovila Sklad kmetijskih zemljišč in gozdov RS, nekdanjim upravljalcem pa pod določenimi pogoji omogočila nadaljnjo uporabo kmetijskih zemljišč. Zakupno razmerje je na kmetijskem področju zelo pomembno obligacijsko razmerje, saj je omogoča odplačen prenos rabe kmetijskega zemljišča, ne da bi se prenašala lastninska pravica, kar je s kratkoročnega vidika za zakupnika cenejša rešitev kot nakup, poleg tega pa ne spreminja lastninskih razmerij, za kar stranke pogosto niso zainteresirane. O pomenu zakupa govori tudi dejstvo, da državni organi nadzorujejo sklepanje pogodb o zakupu, saj država zagotavlja posebno varstvo z usmerjanjem pravnega prometa s kmetijskimi zemljišči. Na podlagi primerjave zakonodaje na področju kmetijskega zakupa v Sloveniji in treh evropskih državah (Švici, Avstriji in Nemčiji) smo ugotovili, da kmetijska zemljiška zakonodaja v Sloveniji ureja le nekatera pomembnejša vprašanja zakupa kmetijskih zemljišč, vendar ne vseh. Določbe so zelo splošne, zaščita zakupnika pa bi bila lahko močnejša in učinkovitejša. Oddaja v zakup je dolgotrajen in zahteven postopek ter omejen le na predzakupne upravičence, ki sprejmejo zakupodajalčevo ponudbo in uživajo najboljši prednostni vrstni red. V veljavi je prosto dogovarjanje o višini zakupnine. Spori in nesporazumi se rešujejo le na rednih sodiščih, saj slovenska zakonodaja ne predvideva specializiranega organa, ki bi izvensodno reševal manjše nesporazume, kot so ugotavljanje stanja zakupljene stvari ob oddaji v zakup in ob vrnitvi, vlaganje v kmetijsko zemljišče v zakupu ipd. . Sodno varstvo zakupnika je zagotovljeno na rednih sodiščih, sodni postopki pa so povečini dolgotrajni. Alternativno reševanje sporov je mogoče na podlagi splošnih predpisov o mediaciji, arbitraži in drugih zunajsodnih postopkov, ki pa so v pra The aim of this Master Thesis was to research the regulation of a lease contract in Slovenia and regulation of lease contracts in similar countries, which the Slovene legislation uses as model in many regulations. Until the adoption of the Obligations Act (ZOR) dating from 1978, the rules of the Austrian General Citizen Code from the year 1811 applied on the Slovene territory. The Obligations Act regulated the obligational relations and also the lease contract in a separate section. In 2001, the provisions of the Obligations Act, relating to lease, were replaced by the currently applicable Code of Obligations (OZ) which regulates the contracts on the assignment of the right to use and under this notion two types of registered, regulated contracts on use, namely lease or rent and loan for use contract. The current special regulations on the lease of agricultural land originate from the 1970s, when the Agricultural Land Act was adopted which regulated the turnover of agricultural land in a more integral way, including lease and also between owners, not merely between the owners and the so-called social sector. This special regulation of lease was accompanied by land maximum, which a farmer was not allowed to exceed, not even through the lease of agricultural land. The provisions gave priority of the lease of agricultural land to the social sector (agricultural organisations) before farmers (individual agricultural producers). Lease became more popular with the transition to a social-economic system which provided the right of title, regulated the return of property that was nationalised though the regulations on agricultural reform and abolished the land maximum. This was further boosted by the contemporary economic developments in the agricultural sector which only guarantee the survival of large agricultural holdings and stagnation or ruin of smaller ones. After eliminating the land maximum for individuals and legal entities, all agricultural holdings, regardless of their legal form (farmers, entrepreneurs or companies and other legal entities) were given the opportunity to expand, by means of purchase or lease of agricultural land. In the phase of ownership transformation, agricultural land was mainly purchased by the state which established the Farm Land and Forest Fund of the Republic of Slovenia to manage the land and enabled the previous operators to further use the agricultural land under certain conditions. Lease relationship is a very important obligational relationship in the agricultural sector, as it enables the transfer of the use of agricultural land, against payment, without simultaneously transferring the title to such land, which is much less expensive than purchase, from the lessee’s short-term point of view, and does not change the ownership relations, in which the parties are usually not interested. The importance of leasing is also supported by the fact that government bodies control the signing of contracts, since the state guarantees special protection by guiding legal transactions involving agricultural land. Based on the comparison of legislation regulating the agricultural lease in Slovenia and three European countries (Switzerland, Germany and Austria), it was established that in Slovenia, the agricultural land legislation only regulated some important issues of agricultural land lease, but not all of them. The provisions are much more general and lessee protection could be stronger and more efficient. Lease is a long-term and demanding procedure, limited only to pre-lease beneficiaries who accept the lessor’s offer and are entitled to the best order of priority. The amount of lease is agreed freely between the parties. Disputes and disagreements are only resolved in regular courts, since the Slovene legislation does not foresee a specialised body that would resolve minor disputes out-of-court, such as for example determination of the state of leased subject upon handover into lease and return, investments in the agricultural land upon lease, etc. Legal protection of the le

Opće-uporabljiva dobra su opća dobra i javna dobra u općoj uporabi. Korištenje opće-uporabljivog dobra može biti zajedničko i zasebno. Zajedničko korištenje opće-uporabljivog dobra je anonimno i neosobno, slobodno i jednakopravno, načelno besplatno, te mora biti sukladno namjeni tog dobra. Zasebno korištenje opće-uporabljivog dobra može biti, prvo, radi ostvarenja javnog interesa kako radi izgradnje građevina za javne potrebe tako i radi obavljanja određene javne službe i drugo, radi obavljanja gospodarske djelatnosti u interesu zasebnog korisnika tog dobra. Zasebno korištenje opće-uporabljivog dobra prelazi granicu njegovog zajedničkog korištenja, te je za takvo korištenje potrebno posebno odobrenje javnopravnog tijela. Takvo posebno odobrenje može biti u formi upravnog akta ili davanjem koncesije ili sklapanjem ugovora o javno-privatnom partnerstvu, te na kraju i u formi građanskopravnog posla davanjem opće-uporabljivog dobra u najam ili zakup. U radu se analiziraju pojedini pravni temelji zasebnog korištenja opće-uporabljivog dobra, te posebnosti pravnog uređenja svakog od tih pravnih temelja., General- use goods are common goods in general usage. The use of general- use goods can be communal and individual. Communal use of general -use goods is anonymous and impersonal, free and equitable. In principle it is free and must be appropriately designated. Individual use of general- use goods can firstly be in the interest of the public as in the construction of buildings for public needs as well as in the implementation of certain public services, and secondly for carrying out economic activities in the interests of the individual user of that good. Individual use of general-use goods extends the boundary of its communal use. For such use, the special consent of public legal bodies is necessary. Such particular consent can be in the form of an administrative act or awarding concessions or formulating contracts on public-private partnership and finally also in the form of civil legal work with the issuing of general- use goods for rental or lease. In this paper, certain legal fundamentals of the individual use of general -use goods are analysed as are the peculiarities of the legal regulation of each of these legal fundamentals.

Naslov III. Ugovori i napose otuđenje Knjige V. Zakonika kanonskoga prava ima 9 kanona (kann. 1290-1298), a uređuje pitanje ugovora, otuđenja i zakupa. Pitanju ugovora posvećen je kan. 1290, a pitanju otuđenja ostali kanoni ovoga naslova, izuzevši kan. 1297 koji govori o zakupu. Kan. 1298 raspravlja o zakupu i prodaji crkvenih dobara upraviteljima tih dobara i njihovim rođacima krvnog ili tazbinskog srodstva. Kan. 1290 posuđuje pojmovno-terminološko utemeljenje govora o ugovorima, bilo općenito bilo posebno i o plaćanjima, od vlastitoga građanskog prava svake pojedine zemlje u kojoj se Crkva nalazi i djeluje. Riječ je o kanonizaciji građanskoga prava. Otuđenje se promatra i uređuje kao jedan pravni posao koji se razlikuje od čina izvanrednog upravljanja. Stoga Zakonik posebno govori o činima upravljanja i otuđenja. Čini se otuđenja odnose samo na dobra koja po zakonitom upisu tvore osnovnu imovinu neke javne pravne osobe i kojih vrijednost prelazi pravom određenu svotu. Za valjanost se otuđenja tih dobara zahtijeva dopuštenje mjerodavnog autoriteta. Svakako treba naglasiti da je pojam otuđenja na kanonskom području doživio semantički razvitak tako da ga ne smijemo izjednačiti samo s građanskim pojmom prodaje, nego se on proteže na bilo koji drugi posao kojim se može pogoršati imovinsko stanje pravne osobe. Novi Zakonik napušta put opće kodifikacije u pitanju zakupa te prepušta biskupskim konferencijama da ga urede, vodeći računa o mjesnim prilikama svakog naroda, i da donesu konkretne odredbe o dobivanju dopuštenja od mjerodavnog crkvenog autoriteta. Valja naglasiti da je i zakup vrsta ugovora te, stoga, i za njega vrijede građanski zakoni koji su kanoniziram., Title III. Contracts and especially alienation of Book V of Cannon Law consists of 9, cannons (Can. 1290-1298), and determines the question of contracts, alienation and leasing. The issue of contracts can be found in Can. 1290, while the issue of alienation and other cannons within this same title, with the exception of Can. 1297, which refers to leasing. Can. 1298 discusses leasing and sales of Church goods, administrators of those goods and their relatives of consanguinity or affinity. Can. 1290 borrows notional-terminology based on speech of contracts, be they general or specific and of payments, from civil rights for each individual country where the Church can be found and acts. This in fact is the canonisation of civil rights. Confiscation is observed and determined as a legal affair that differs from the act of extraordinary administration. As such, the Code particularly refers to the acts of administration and confiscation. It seems that alienation relates only to goods that are legally registered and form basic assets of some public legal entity and where the value of these goods exceed a certain amount. Validity of the alienation of these goods requires consent from the relevant authorities. Of course, it is necessary to note that the notion of alienation in cannon law experienced a semantic development so that we cannot simply equate it to the civil notion of sale, but it affects any other affairs that could deteriorate the property status of a legal entity. The new Code abandons the path of general codices with regard to lease and leaves this to the conference of bishops to order it, keeping in mind local circumstances of each nation and for them to adopt actual directives to obtain consent from the relevant Church authorities. It is worth noting that leasing too is a form of contract and as such, it succumbs to civil laws that have been canonised.