Direct representation in Roman law with reference to modern law
The institute of direct representation is indispensable in contemporary law. The first modern civil codes acknowledged direct representation regulating power of attorney through a mandate contract. The second half of the 19th century saw a change in that perception. Starting with the German Civil Co...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of Belgrade, Faculty of Law, Belgrade, Serbia
2020-01-01
|
| Series: | Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0003-2565/2020/0003-25652002123C.pdf |
| Summary: | The institute of direct representation is indispensable in contemporary law. The first modern civil codes acknowledged direct representation regulating power of attorney through a mandate contract. The second half of the 19th century saw a change in that perception. Starting with the German Civil Code, legal texts, including the Serbian Contract and Torts Act, prescribe power of attorney as a separate institute. The contemporary law principle of direct representation contrasts with the Roman law prohibition of direct representation contained in ancient Roman sources. Under the prevailing Pandectist view, it is due to this prohibition that Roman law did not permit direct representation. The article analyses the cases in which, courtesy of classical Roman jurists, direct representation was allowed despite formal prohibition. The absence of a direct representation concept definition and general prescribing does not justify the claim that it was not applied under Roman law. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0003-2565 2406-2693 |