Предпоставки за предявяването на иск за неоснователно обогатяване след прескрибирането на менителничния ефект
Prerequisites for Bringing a Claim for Unjust Enrichment Following the Prescription of the Negotiable Instruments

Author(s): Borislav Naydenov
Subject(s): Law, Constitution, Jurisprudence, Civil Law, Commercial Law
Published by: Пловдивски университет »Паисий Хилендарски«
Keywords: negotiable instruments; bill of exchange; promissory note; prescription; claim; unjust enrichment; Art. 534 of the Bulgarian Commercial Act
Summary/Abstract: Pursuant to Art. 531, para.1 of the Bulgarian Commercial Act, the claims regarding the bill of exchange against the payer shall be repaid within a three-year prescription from the maturity day, while pursuant to Art. 532 of the Bulgarian Commercial Act, the prescription period shall be interrupted only in respect of the person against whom the act was committed. The same rules regarding the prescription apply to the promissory note (arg. Art. 537 of the Bulgarian Commercial Act).With the expiry of the three-year prescription period, the applicant’s right of claim shall be extinguished, with a legal basis Art. 417, item 10 of the Bulgarian Civil Procedure Code.The expiration of the prescription period under Art. 531, para.1 of the Bulgarian Commercial Act does not extinguish the right of the bearer of the promissory note to demand from the debtor the payment of the due amount. Art. 534, para.1 of the Bulgarian Commercial Act enables the holder of a security order to lodge a claim for unjust enrichment against the issuer or the payer upon them, when:1. Has lost the claims on a bill of exchange, promissory note or cheque (negotiable instruments) due to prescription; 2. Has lost the claims on a bill of exchange, promissory note or cheque (negotiable instruments) due to failure to take the necessary actions to preserve the rights thereon.Insofar as no comprehensive study of the subject is made in the specialized legal literature in Bulgarian, this article is the first in the contemporary Bulgarian legal doctrine a detailed analysis of the theoretical and practical problems of the claim, with a legal basis Art. 534 of the Bulgarian Commercial Act.The article also provides a detailed critical analysis of the case law of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Cassation Court of the Republic of Bulgaria on the subject, as well as a comparison with the old practice of the Supreme Cassation Court of the Kingdom of Bulgaria.A number of practical and theoretical hypotheses have been considered, including the issue of the debtor's unjust enrichment on the bill of effect, the objection of "cashlessness" of the bill of exchange, and other options for the development of the court proceedings on the claim, with a legal basis of Article 534 of the Bulgarian Commercial Act.

• Details
• Contents