Hello!
How are ustedeees? Around here we like last week and as above, no news on the front. I'll start without further delay, and in response to a request from a reader of this blog, with a somewhat complicated issue but I think it's interesting anyway: the right of first refusal.
ubiquéis To give this issue is addressed in civil law and is quite common (not, heaven knows, the antichresis of 1881 of the CC), so would not be surprising that sooner or later you come across this institution. The right of first refusal in itself is not difficult to understand, although the interpretation of the courts and the doctrine (which, as usual, is divided) causes occasional headache. Put on the caps think, that we will do so.
First things first, is this what it is? I'd better explain with an example. I magina that John wants to sell the car to Antonio for 5,000 €. If I have a right of first refusal before selling the car to Antonio, Juan I have to say: - "What do you want?. The withdrawal , meanwhile, operates when John and I sold the car to Antonio, and allows me to rescind the sale. Such rights are called "stock options, because they give the person who has the first option to buy the thing. I can me confused with some detail, but I think the basic scheme would become this. I hope that here, either, although doubts are welcome in the comments below.
Although I like to get into divisions and subdivisions that both judges and professors enjoy doing, with regard to pre-emption there are two types that are worth highlighting: the pre-emption legal and conventional. The law is one that is recognized in one or another law (eg the tenant's lease on the ground, which can be found in 25 of the LAU), while the conventional is that a contract is agreed.
The legal problem that has this right can be reduced to the discussion of whether it is effective inter parties or erga omnes , terms already know if you take some time following this blog. This is a problem that does not occur in the pre-emption law, and that the rights granted by the laws are usually erga omnes (is not? An attorney to correct me?). Continuing the example above, a case of conventional pre-emption, the question would be as follows: if I have the right of first refusal to sell him the car Juan Antonio, to whom I can claim him? If you believe that I can yell at Antonio through, go to page 24 ( erga omnes), if you think I can only claim to John, to pass over 53 (inter partes ).
Arguments in favor of erga omnes: If I can not claim the third (Antonio) the right of redemption remains in anything, because I can not afford the car. Arguments against: Antonio purchase in good faith and he knew nothing of the contract we had me and John, he will not come with stories. Solution? No, the law says it is effective i nter parties and the doctrine that is erga omnes. As if this were not enough, in the case of conventional pre-emption in land comes into play around the theme of the deed and property registration, which are a mess that, if you feel like trataremos más adelante.
Ya podéis quitaros la gorra de pensar. ¿Alguien se apunta a seguir el debate en los comentarios? ¡¡Wohoo!!
¡A cuidarse!
How are ustedeees? Around here we like last week and as above, no news on the front. I'll start without further delay, and in response to a request from a reader of this blog, with a somewhat complicated issue but I think it's interesting anyway: the right of first refusal.
ubiquéis To give this issue is addressed in civil law and is quite common (not, heaven knows, the antichresis of 1881 of the CC), so would not be surprising that sooner or later you come across this institution. The right of first refusal in itself is not difficult to understand, although the interpretation of the courts and the doctrine (which, as usual, is divided) causes occasional headache. Put on the caps think, that we will do so.
First things first, is this what it is? I'd better explain with an example. I magina that John wants to sell the car to Antonio for 5,000 €. If I have a right of first refusal before selling the car to Antonio, Juan I have to say: - "What do you want?. The withdrawal , meanwhile, operates when John and I sold the car to Antonio, and allows me to rescind the sale. Such rights are called "stock options, because they give the person who has the first option to buy the thing. I can me confused with some detail, but I think the basic scheme would become this. I hope that here, either, although doubts are welcome in the comments below. Although I like to get into divisions and subdivisions that both judges and professors enjoy doing, with regard to pre-emption there are two types that are worth highlighting: the pre-emption legal and conventional. The law is one that is recognized in one or another law (eg the tenant's lease on the ground, which can be found in 25 of the LAU), while the conventional is that a contract is agreed.
The legal problem that has this right can be reduced to the discussion of whether it is effective inter parties or erga omnes , terms already know if you take some time following this blog. This is a problem that does not occur in the pre-emption law, and that the rights granted by the laws are usually erga omnes (is not? An attorney to correct me?). Continuing the example above, a case of conventional pre-emption, the question would be as follows: if I have the right of first refusal to sell him the car Juan Antonio, to whom I can claim him? If you believe that I can yell at Antonio through, go to page 24 ( erga omnes), if you think I can only claim to John, to pass over 53 (inter partes ).
Arguments in favor of erga omnes: If I can not claim the third (Antonio) the right of redemption remains in anything, because I can not afford the car. Arguments against: Antonio purchase in good faith and he knew nothing of the contract we had me and John, he will not come with stories. Solution? No, the law says it is effective i nter parties and the doctrine that is erga omnes. As if this were not enough, in the case of conventional pre-emption in land comes into play around the theme of the deed and property registration, which are a mess that, if you feel like trataremos más adelante.
Ya podéis quitaros la gorra de pensar. ¿Alguien se apunta a seguir el debate en los comentarios? ¡¡Wohoo!!
¡A cuidarse!
0 comments:
Post a Comment