
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/">
  <dc:creator id="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5336-1801 https://plus.cobiss.net/cobiss/sr/sr/conor/33626727">Despotović, Danijela</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator id="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6902-3794">Kovačević, Maja</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator id="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1424-3041">Rašević, Živorad</dc:creator>
  <dc:subject xml:lang="eng">Keywords: eviction, legal defect, contractual liability, preclusion, good faith and fair dealing</dc:subject>
  <dc:date>2026</dc:date>
  <dc:rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode</dc:rights>
  <dc:description xml:lang="eng">Abstract: The legal nature of the subjective time limit set forth in Article 515 of the Law on Obligations of the Republic
of Serbia, which regulates the buyer’s right in cases of eviction, raises a number of theoretical and practical issues. Although prevailing legal doctrine and case law regard this time limit as preclusive, such interpretation becomes problematic in situations where the seller was aware of a third party’s right and
failed to disclose it. The paper particularly examines the limits of contractual exclusion of the seller’s liability, viewed through the lens of the principle of good faith and fair dealing. By analyzing relevant judicial
decisions and comparative legal solutions in German, French, Anglo-American, and international commercial law (CISG), the study argues for a clearer legislative determination of the nature of the time
limit under Article 515 and for the introduction of exceptions in cases of the seller’s bad faith. It concludes that such a reform would enhance legal certainty, safeguard contractual equilibrium, and align Serbian
contract law with modern European standards.</dc:description>
  <dc:description xml:lang="srp">Sažetak: Pravna priroda subjektivnog roka iz člana 515. Zakona o obligacionim odnosima, kojim se uređuje
ostvarivanje prava kupca u slučaju evikcije, otvara brojna teorijska i praktična pitanja. U domaćoj doktrini i sudskoj praksi taj rok se pretežno smatra prekluzivnim, ali takvo tumačenje postaje sporno kada je prodavac znao za postojanje prava trećeg lica i tu okolnost prećutao. Posebna pažnja posvećuje se granicama ugovorne derogacije odgovornosti prodavca u svetlu načela savesnosti i poštenja. Analizom sudske prakse i uporednih rešenja u nemačkom, francuskom, angloameričkom i međunarodnom trgovačkom pravu (CISG) ukazuje se na potrebu preciznijeg normativnog određenja roka iz člana 515,
uz predviđanje izuzetaka u slučajevima nesavesnog postupanja prodavca. Zaključuje se da bi takvo rešenje doprinelo pravnoj sigurnosti, ravnoteži ugovornih strana i usklađivanju sa savremenim evropskim
standardima.</dc:description>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:identifier>https://unilib.phaidrabg.rs/o:9630</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>doi:10.51738/kpolisa.2026.1r.ddmkzr</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>cobiss:193710601</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>ISSN: 1820-4589</dc:identifier>
  <dc:title xml:lang="eng">The legal character of the subjective time limit under article 515 of the law on obligations: between good faith and formalism</dc:title>
  <dc:title xml:lang="srp">Pravna priroda roka iz člana 515. ZOO: između savesnosti i formalizma</dc:title>
  <dc:coverage xml:lang="srp">Ključne reči: evikcija, pravni nedostatak, ugovorna odgovornost, prekluzija, savesnost i poštenje</dc:coverage>
  <dc:source>Kultura polisa</dc:source>
  <dc:source>volume: 23</dc:source>
  <dc:source>number: 1</dc:source>
  <dc:source>startpage: 69</dc:source>
  <dc:source>endpage: 80</dc:source>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:format>214832 bytes</dc:format>
  <dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>
