Jetzt bestellen : Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung (Art. 1–352 ZPO sowie Art. 400–408 ZPO)

Schadensersatz statt der Eigentumsvormerkung?

Die (Un-)Anwendbarkeit des Schadensersatzanspruches statt der Leistung (§§ 280 Abs. 1, Abs. 3, 281 BGB) auf den Zustimmungsanspruch des Vormerkungsberechtigten gegen den Dritterwerber (§ 888 Abs. 1 BGB)

'Compensation Instead of Priority Notice? The (In)Applicability of the Claim for Compensation Instead of Performance (§§ 280 para. 1, para. 3, 281 German Civil Code) to the Consent Claim of the Person Entitled to Priority Notice Against the Third-Party Acquirer (§ 888 para. 1 German Civil Code)': The author offers an answer to the question of whether the person entitled to priority notice can monetize the claim under § 888 para. 1 German Civil Code instead of enforcing it. The application can be constructed by treating the demand for compensation as an approval of the disposition contrary to the priority notice. However, the claim for compensation does not match the interests underlying the legal relationship between the person entitled to priority notice and the third-party acquirer.

Oktober 2025, 317 Seiten, Schriften zum Bürgerlichen Recht, Bd. 602, Deutsch
Duncker & Humblot GmbH
978-3-428-19597-8

Weitere Titel der Reihe: Schriften zum Bürgerlichen Recht

Alle anzeigen

Weitere Titel zum Thema