PERPETUATIO IURISDICTIONIS У НОВИЈОЈ ЈУГОСЛОВЕНСКОЈ ПРАВНОЈ МИСЛИ
PERPETUATIO IURISDICTIONIS IN RECCENT YUGOSLAV LEGAL THEORY

Summary/Abstract: The autor attempts to answer two questions in the present article which became more controversial after the entering into force of the first Yugoslav Law on Private International Law, namely which is the relevant moment for assessing the jurisdiction of Yugoslav court and whether the change of circumstances which came about after that moment provokes the loss of international jurisdiction, or the jurisdiction is maintained (stabilized) — so-called perpetuatio iurisdictionis? That problem is caused by relative lack of precision of article 81 of the new Law. The author reviews in his text the conceptions of other scholars, while concluding that the majority, is opting for the standрoint according to which the relevant moment for assessing the jurisdiction is the one of filing the action with the court, and not of delivering the summons to the defendant (accused) — as specified by Law — which is treated as an editing error. On the other hand, majority of authors also consider that Yugoslavia has entered, with this new piece of legislation, into the group of countries which adopt the principle of stabilizing of jurisdiction. While elaborating his standрoint, the author attempts to defend the thesis — (i) that the relevant moment for assessing the jurisdiction is the one of serving the defendant with the accusation papers (i.e. the standрoint of the minority of authors) and (ii) that the principle of perpetuatio iurisdictionis is the one which is functioning according to new regulations (the standрoint of the majority).

• Details
• Contents