MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W854993281

Fiducia in the New Romanian Civil Code

2014· article· en· W854993281 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexandru Florin Măgureanu

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal principles and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFiduciaryCivil codeBeneficiaryLawRomanianPolitical scienceCivil law (Civil law)Commercial lawBusinessLaw and economicsEconomicsDuty
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT.Fiducia is a new institution that originates from the institution of specific to equity law, introduced in the Romanian law system, by the New Civil Code in 2011. The New Romanian Civil Code defines as a legal operation, by which one or more constitutors transfer real rights, accounts receivable, or other patrimonial rights, or a group of such rights, future and present, to one or more fiduciaries that exercise them with a specific purpose, in the benefit of one or more beneficiaries. These rights create an autonomous patrimony, distinct from other rights and obligations that the fiduciaries have. The provisions of the New Civil Code regarding are very similar to the ones of other European civil codes and also present some similarities with the ones of the Civil Code of Quebec. An important aspect of this complex operation is that the fiduciary is considered a real owner of the goods that are the object of the fiduciary contract and in this quality he can exercise all the rights that the proprietor would have. However the duration of the transfer cannot exceed 33 years, after which the patrimonial mass is transferred to the beneficiary, or if the beneficiary is absent, it returns to the constitutor. Also, in matters regarding the administration of the fiduciary patrimony, whenever there is no special regulation, general rules of administration will be applied.Keywords: fiducia; contract; New Civil Code; trust1. PreliminariesInitially, was a real contract in Roman law, starting with the beginning of the classical era, together with mutuum (a form of loan for perishable goods), the pledge, commodate, and deposit. Fiducia was a contract consisting in the alienation of a good, followed by a convention through which the receiver of that good was obliged to return it at a fixed term. There were two types of fiducia, cum creditore (a real contract consisting in the guarantee of a debt by transferring the property of a good by the debtor to his creditor. The creditor was obliged to return the good when the debt was paid) and cum amico (a loan based on trust) (Cococ, Magureanu, 2012: 108). Fiducia was not isolated from the solemn means of transmitting the property, but was an indivisible juridical operation, inscribed on mancipatio or on in iure cessio, meaning it could not be separated from them. As a result, the debtor was competing with other creditors of his creditor and was able to obtain only a fraction of the value of the goods that he was giving as a guarantee, even if he was paying his debt in full.We must note however, that the introduced in the New Civil Code, in 2011, does not originate from Roman law, but from the French institution which, at its turn is inspired by the an institution specific to Anglo-Saxon law. Even if in Romanian law is greatly inspired by the French civil code (art. 2011-2030), it shares some elements with the regulated, for example by the Civil Code of Quebec (art. 1260-1370). There are numerous similarities between fiducia and the trust, however the differences between them prevent us from considering the two terms as synonyms for the same juridical institution (for example, in order to create a the sole manifestation of will of the constitutor will suffice, while will always originate from a written contract).Prior to the regulation of this institution in our New Civil Code, there was no stipulation regarding fiducia, in Romanian law, excepting the Law nr. 51/1995 regarding the profession of lawyer. According to art. 3 of this Law, the lawyer was having the possibility to place and capitalize certain assets that were given to him as a deposit by his clients.2. The Separation of PatrimonyFiducia is based on another institution, also new for our legal system. According to the New Civil Code [art. 31, para. (2)] the patrimony may be divided or appropriated to a purpose, but only to the extent provided by law (similar to art. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary Readings in Law and Social JusticeSame topicLegal principles and applicationsFrench-language works237,207