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)

89,90 €

inkl. MwSt. und Versand · Lieferzeit 1–2 Werktage

Gesetzliche Gewährleistung: 2 Jahre · Details

Nur noch 1 verfügbar

Beschreibung

'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.

Artikeldetails

EAN

9783428195978

Sprache

Deutsch

Einband / Art

Taschenbuch

Maße

232 x 156 x 23 mm

Erscheinungsjahr

2025

Verlag / Hersteller

Duncker & Humblot GmbH