| Abstract: | Magistrantūros baigiamajame darbe keliamas klausimas yra aktualus, kone kasdien, su įvairiais sandoriais susiduriantiems žmonėms: „Ar Lietuvos teisės doktrinoje ir praktikoje geros moralės samprata (CK 1.81 str. pagrindu) yra apibrėžiama siaurinamai?“ Darbo problema persipina ne tik su pačiu teisės mokslu, bet ir su žmogaus teisėmis ir vidiniais moraliniais žmogaus įsitikinimais. Darbe siekiama išryškinti moralės svarbą sandorių institutui bei koks yra sutarčių reguliavimas kai sudaromi sandoriai, prieštaraujantys gerai moralei, o tuo pačiu ir viešai tvarkai bei civiliniame kodekse įtvirtintiems teisingumo, sąžiningumo, protingumo principams. Geros moralės aiškinimas priklauso nuo teisės doktrinos ir teismų praktikos nuomonės, todėl darbe pasitelkiama dalis Lietuvos Aukščiausiojo Teismo nagrinėtų bylų ir užsienio teismų praktikos įžvalgos, kad būtų atsakyta į klausimą ar gera moralė CK 1.81 str. pagrindu yra aiškinama siaurinamai.
Pirmoje darbo dalyje išsamiai nagrinėjama Lietuvos teisės doktrina, plačiau žvelgiant į Lietuvos Respublikos įstatymus bei aiškinantis, kaip dažnai ir kokiame kontekste juose sutinkama geros moralės sąvoka bei kaip sąveikauja teisė ir moralė. Galiausiai, skyriuje nagrinėjama moralės svarba sandorių institutui bei kas įvyksta, kai sudaryti sandoriai neatitinka geros moralės.
Antroje darbo dalyje išsamiai nagrinėjama ir aptariama Lietuvos Aukščiausiojo teismo praktika. Siekiama išryškinti, kokios šabloninės frazės dažniausiai kartojasi aiškinant bylas, kurios iškeliamos CK 1.81 str. pagrindu. Išsiaiškinama kokius asmenų veiksmus teismas laiko prieštaraujančiais gerai moralei bei prieinama prie išvados, kad Lietuvoje CK 1.81 str. dažniausiai yra aiškinamas kartu arba pasitelkiant į pagalbą CK 1.5 str., arba CK 1.80 str. Taip pat teismų praktikoje pasigendama tikslaus ir aiškaus geros moralės sąvokos apibrėžimo, kadangi teismo nuomone, geros moralės sąvoka su kiekviena byla ir skirtinga faktine situacija kinta.
Trečioje darbo dalyje pateikiami negaliojančių sutarčių pavyzdžiai iš keleto užsienio valstybių, kai jos prieštarauja gerai moralei ir kaip gera moralė traktuotina šiuo metu vykdomo tarptautinio teisinio projekto rėmuose.
Magistro baigiamajame darbe iškelta hipotezė, ar Lietuvos teisės doktrinoje bei praktikoje geros moralės samprata CK 1.81 str. pagrindu aiškinama siaurinamai – pasitvirtina.
The question posed in the master's thesis is relevant, almost daily, to people facing various transactions. Is the concept of good morality (based on Article 1.81 of the Civil Code) defined narrowly in Lithuanian law doctrine and practice? The problem of this work is intertwined not only with the science of law itself, but also with human rights and internal moral beliefs. The aim of the work is to emphasize the importance of morality to the Institute of Transactions and the regulation of contracts when transactions that contradict good morals, and at the same time public order and principles of justice, fairness and reasoning established in the Civil Code. The interpretation of good morality depends on the doctrine of law and the practice of court practice; is interpreted narrowly?
The first part of the work is a detailed analysis of Lithuanian doctrine of law and the attempt to find out what the definition of good morality is. Also, the laws of the Republic of Lithuania are more widely considered and how often the concept of good morality and the relationship between law and morality is found in them and in what context. Finally, the chapter examines the importance of morality for the Institute of Transactions. It deals with binding criteria to make a transaction effective, clarifies the principle of freedom of contract, the importance of human will and the essence of the principle of good faith. Also, we find out what is happening and how it is classified when the transactions are not in good morality.
In the second part of the work, the case law of the Supreme Court of Lithuania is examined and discussed in detail. Only those Supreme Court cases that are directly related to the article and the concept of good moral morality were used in the work. The focus was on analyzing the facts of the case in order to understand what the actions of the parties were in the court's view are considered not to be good morals. The aim of the thesis is also to highlight the most common patterns that are repeated in interpreting the cases raised in Article 1.81of the Civil Code basis. Finding out what actions the court considers to be contrary to good morality and reaches the conclusion that Art. is usually interpreted together or with the help of Article 1.5 of the Civil Code or Article 1.80 of the Civil Code. The case-law also lacks a clear and clear definition of the concept of good morality, since the court considers that the concept of good morality with each case and different factual situation is changing.
The third part of the work contains examples of invalid contracts from foreign countries when they contradict good morals and as good morals within the framework of the current international legal project. The last part of the work reviews the cases and their factual circumstances, which foreign courts have recognized as not meeting the good moral criterion. In this section we see the difference between the case law prevailing in Lithuania and the practice that is well established in the legal systems of foreign states. It has been concluded that the concept of good morality is more widely understood in cases examined by foreign states, and the concept itself covers a wider range of actions.
The master's thesis revealed:
The criterion of good morality is widely accepted and applied in the legislation of the Republic of Lithuania and should be widely applied in the spheres of public life. The concept of good morality is left to be interpreted in the doctrine of law and case law. Hence, the law is closely interacting with the moral principles of human and public values, and what contradicts morality is also contrary to law. The interpretation of the concept of good morality is relevant not only in the legal systems of Lithuania but also in foreign countries. The analysis of non-moral transactions in European countries has also shown that there is no consensus among European countries on what transactions are found to be contrary to good morals. After analyzing and systematizing the literature and case-law used for this work, the tasks were accomplished and the goal was achieved - it was established that the concept of good morality in Lithuanian legal doctrine and court practice was analyzed in Article 1.81 of Civil Code is interpreted narrowly because:
The definition of good morality is not provided in the law, and the criterion of good morality is not absolute, and the concept itself is not self-contained, so it has other categories similar to it, expressing similar public and individual human internalities. Some of them are public order, morality or ethical standards. The case-law lacks a precise and clear definition of good morality, because with each case and different factual situation, the concept of good morality changes, but if the contract contradicts public order, good morality or law, the transaction becomes void. In Lithuanian legal doctrine, the concept of good morality is interpreted repeatedly and using the same template phrases that Supreme Court of Lithuania later uses. In Lithuania, the practice of Supreme Court clearly shows that Article 1.81 of Civil Code is interpreted together or with the help of Article 1.5 of Civil Code, or Art. 1.80 of Civil Code. There is no applicable European doctrine and practice to establish a unified concept of good morals; The legal rules relating to transaction-based morality are left to the direct discretion of national law. In the Lithuanian legal system, taking into account the broader profile of cases in European countries, there is a lack of broad interpretation of good morals that would be adaptive to dealing with transactions involving life or human dignity that require a wider ethical debate. |
