<<
>>

§ 3. DIFFERENCES OF THE CONTRACT OF THE AUTHOR'S ORDER FROM ADJACENT CIVIL-LAW TRANSACTIONS

Occurrence of legal definition of the contract of the author's order in GK the Russian Federation not only has not ceased scientific polemic about a parity of the given contract with adjacent transactions, but also has formed the basis for its development.

In the doctrine of civil law there is no unity of sights concerning, whether the analyzed contract is independent or can be considered as a version of other civil-law contracts. For definition of a place of the contract of the author's order in system of civil-law contracts it is reversible to its comparative characteristic with adjacent transactions.

The basic criterion on which it is possible to spend otgranichenie one contract from another, its subject is. This results from the fact that the subject allocates the concrete contract among other transactions, including among contracts of one type. J.A.Serkova fairly notices, that about a subject it is necessary to recognise a condition as a condition individualising the transaction [114]. Besides, in any contractual design the contract subject is its base, a kernel [115]. In a contract subject the orientation of actions of the parties, namely the purpose which is pursued by counterparts is reflected, entering in concrete legal relation. JU. V.Romanets understands final legal and economic result on which achievement actions of the parties of the contract [116] are directed as an obligation orientation.

Most often in the legal literature there is an offer on reference of the contract of the author's order to contract relations.

Addressing to consideration of a question on a parity of the turnkey contract and the contract of the author's order, it is necessary to pay attention to the discussion which has developed in the doctrine of civil law concerning definition of a subject of the turnkey contract. So, one scientists consider, that a turnkey contract subject is the result of the performed work [117]. Other scientists carry works which the contractor carries out on the instructions of the customer, and to a turnkey contract subject the result received at their realisation [118]. The offered position is represented to more convincing on following circumstances. First, from the maintenance of item 702 GK the Russian Federation follows, that the contractor undertakes to perform work and to hand over its result to the customer. Hence, the making contract purpose podrjada are both performance of the work, and achievement of certain result. Its basic difference consists in it from the employment contract where the accent is made not on result, and on work process. Secondly, if work under the turnkey contract is executed, but the end result such contract cannot be considered as the executed will not be reached. Thirdly, if as a turnkey contract subject to consider only result (the commodity reference) it will be impossible to spend differentiation of the turnkey contract from the contract of purchase.

So, the turnkey contract subject joins the works which are carried out by the contractor on the instructions of the customer, and also the result received at their realisation. The subject of the contract of the author's order covers creation of object of the copyright corresponding to the agreement of the parties. Thus, subjects of the specified contracts have certain similarity.

Thereupon the question is natural: whether is the contract of the author's order the independent contract or can be considered as the contract of contract type?

In the conclusion of the research centre of private law it is underlined, that the contract of the author's order under the maintenance concerns contracts of contract type [119]. The similar conclusion can be met in judiciary practice [120]. In the civil law theory there is an opinion, that it can be carried conditionally to number author's as a contract subject is product which at the moment of making contract does not exist yet, hence, there is no also an owner of copyrights and the most subjective copyright. Therefore the conclusion that the contract of the author's order is the contract of contract type with feature which is shown in creative character of performed work [121] is proved.

Between these contractual designs absence of special rules about their form is similar. To. P.Tatarkina fairly notices, that the legislator defines a circle of transactions which should be made in the concrete form, using two methods: a method of the general instruction and a lacking general rules method. The first consists in fastening of the general criteria of the transaction at which presence it comes under to fulfilment in the specified form and is used for the instruction of the simple written form. The lacking general rules method of definition of the form of the transaction means, that the form is established for certain kinds of transactions. It is used for the legal instruction as idle time written, and the notarial form of transactions [122]. For analyzed contracts application is come under by general rules about the form of the transactions, the provided items of item 158-165 GK the Russian Federation. The contract form is defined by its subject, subject structure and the price. So, the written form of the contract of the author's order is required only in case of participation of legal bodies on the party of the customer, and also for contracts between citizens if their price exceeds ten thousand roubles. In other cases the oral form of the contract of the author's order is supposed.

At the same time in some sources (comments to GK the Russian Federation) is established, that the contract of the author's order consists in writing [123]. However confirming to the given conclusion scientists do not represent arguments. Besides, and the current legislation analysis does not allow to draw a similar conclusion.

It is represented correct to speak about insufficiency of general provisions GK the Russian Federation about the form of transactions with reference to the contract of the author's order. In IV ch. GK the Russian Federation special provisions about the obligatory written form are fixed concerning the contract on exclusive right alienation (item 1234 GK the Russian Federation) and the licence contract (item 1235 GK the Russian Federation).

Absence of special rules about the form of the contract of the author's order in civil law can negatively affect regulation of relations between the author and the customer. It is necessary to consider, that product is unique and unique. At the moment of making contract product is not created yet. All data about created product (a kind, volume, a genre, etc.) should be accurately adjusted the parties. However if the parties have concluded the oral contract concerning creation of product in cost to ten thousand roubles in case of default or inadequate execution of a contract there can be following difficulties. In - the first, not clearly what proofs will use the parties confirming to making contract. Secondly, how the customer can prove, what gave the task to the author about creation of product with these characteristics? Thirdly, in the contract the bases for a presentation of requirements about entering into product of changes should be provided and dopolne -

WITH. 127.

2013. № 3. WITH. 32.

ny. In case of the oral contract of the author's order it will be practically impossible to force the author to modification which have been provided in their verbal agreement in view of complexity of their proving.

Besides, for today the legislator does not carry the price to number of essential conditions of the cummutative contract of the author's order. Therefore the parties at the conclusion of the given contract can not adjust the price and conclude the contract in the oral form. However how to be in a situation if the created product as a result exceeds at cost of ten thousand roubles? Certainly, it also can complicate process of proving of the fact of making contract of the author's order in case of its default or inadequate execution by counterparts.

For achievement of balance of interests of the parties without an exception cases the contract of the author's order should consist in all in writing. Considering stated expediently to fix in item 1288 GK the Russian Federation a following rule: «the Contract of the author's order consists in writing. Non-observance of the written form attracts invalidity of the contract.

As differences of the contract of the author's order and the turnkey contract the majority of researchers names the following. The making contract main objective podrjada is reduced to creation of material result (thing), and under the contract of the author's order the result of intellectual activity which is non-material (though also embodied in the objective form) and the having special legal regime essentially differing from material objects is created. The turnkey contract does not assume creative character of activity, and presence of certain skills at the contractor [124] is necessary only. E.A.Sukhanov notices, that the contract of the author's order

Provides as well in the subsequent product use, hardly - blows to carry it to number author's [125].

The main difference of the contract of the author's order from the turnkey contract consists in realisation by the author of creative activity. Definition of concept "creativity" which was offered by V.J.Ionas is worthy. Creativity is a process of cerebration which comes to the end with creation of any new result. The difference between creative and not creative activity as believes V.J.Ionas, consists that creativity represents original manufacture of idea while absence of creativity is characterised by reproduction of that has already been created earlier in the course of original creativity [126].

Besides the specified distinctions in a subject of analyzed contracts it is possible to specify and in following features: 1) various subject structure (in the contract of the author's order as the founder-author the physical person acts, in the turnkey contract - any subjects of civil law); 2) the contract of the author's order unlike the turnkey contract provides limited liability of the author; 3) the object created under the turnkey contract, is transferred to the customer on the property right, and according to the contract of the author's order the material carrier in which product contains, can be transferred to the customer either in the property, or in time possession and using; 4) the turnkey contract always vozmezdnyj, and the contract of the author's order can be as vozmezdnym, and gratuitous.

Thus, it is necessary to delimit the contract of the author's order from the turnkey contract.

On pages of the legal literature scientific discussion about a parity of the contractual obligation following from the author's order and obligations, following of contracts on performance nauchnoissledovatelskih, developmental and technological works also is led.

Some authors dogovory on performance of such works carry to the turnkey contract [127]. S.E.Ryabov considers them as a contract version on rendering of services [128]. The position of authors which defend their independence [129] However prevails.

In the civil law doctrine some sights at definition of a subject of contracts at performance of research, developmental and technological works are offered. According to the first position their subject is work of the executor [130]. Other researchers as a subject consider exclusively result of creative work of the executor [131]. According to the third position it is necessary to include in a subject of the analyzed contract both work, and its result [132].

By analogy to a turnkey contract subject it is necessary to support a conclusion that a subject of contracts on performance of research, developmental and technological works is both work of the executor, and its result. Really, to limit a subject of these contracts only to work it is impossible, as besides the work interest for the customer represents also its result. Besides, hardly it is possible to agree and that a subject of considered contracts is only the result of works as the planned result can be not reached, or the negative, unexpected result is received at diligent execution of the contractual obligation.

Such dogovory have some similarity to the contract of the author's order: an orientation on creation of non-material result; the contract subject includes features of performance of works on creation of results of intellectual activity; work, as a rule, has creative, intellectual character; execution of a contract is carried out personally (attraction of the third parties probably at performance of developmental and technological works) [133].

Meanwhile in the legislation distinctions between the given contracts contain also. So, the contract on performance of developmental and technological works regulates relations in the field of creation of results of intellectual activity, such as the inventions useful to model, industrial samples, the computer programs, topology of integrated microcircuits and other results in scientific and technical and industrial sphere while the contract of the author's order regulates relations in the field of creation of objects of the copyright. Developmental and technological works are complex as include not only works of creative character, but also preparation of the corresponding documentation, and also the industrial and technical works directed on manufacturing of the sample and check of its characteristics.

Difference of the contract on performance of research works from the contract of the author's order consists in a various circle of subjects. Under the contract of the author's order the executor is the author - the physical person. In the contract on performance of research works as the executor legal bodies - scientific institutions (scientific research institutes), as a rule, act. However participation of the physical person as the executor under the given contract is not excluded.

Under the contract of the author's order product of a science, the literature or art is created. Result of research work is exclusively new scientific knowledge. The received scientific result should be fixed in the objective form (the scientific report, the conclusion of the expert, etc.). The result of scientific research can be finished to the public in different forms [134].

Hence, a contract main objective on performance nauchnoissledovatelskih works is creation of an innovation which has scientific value. The result of the contract on performance of research works is interesting to the customer from the point of view of the maintenance (those conclusions and those recommendations which are done by the executor), instead of forms [135].

In favour of independence of contracts on performance nauchnoissledovatelskih, developmental and technological works own subject of the contract, a regulation of the rights and duties of the parties, and also such formal criterion, as an arrangement of contracts on performance of the given kinds of works in separate chapter GK the Russian Federation, and contracts of the author's order in ch testifies. IV GK the Russian Federation.

It is necessary to notice, that on occasion product can be created at enforcement of the treaty podrjada or contracts on performance of research, developmental and technological works. This conclusion proves to be true the rules fixed in item 1296 GK the Russian Federation. Such situation is possible in a case when the turnkey contract did not provide product creation, but in the course of its execution necessity for it has come to light, or the contract provided, that in the course of the contract any product can be created, but it is concrete in the contract was not defined [136]. The Vivid example of that contract works can have creative character V.A.Hohlov «has resulted... If the contractor, for example, not only spreads a fireplace, but also creates on it a panel from slices of a various stone» [137]. In similar cases the court recognises the contract mixed as contains elements actually turnkey contracts and contracts of the author's order [138].

The exclusive right to the product created at enforcement of the treaty podrjada, or contracts on performance of research, developmental or technological works belongs to the contractor (executor) if the contract does not provide other. Hence, the customer posesses the qualified right for product use. In a case when according to the contract the exclusive right to product is transferred the customer or the third party specified to it, the contractor (executor) has the right to use the product created by it for own needs, instead of with a view of for which achievement the given contract has been concluded.

Products of a science, the literature, art can be created within the limits of the state or municipal contract. A qualifying sign of the given contract is the special subject structure - public formation, and also the special purpose - maintenance of the state or municipal needs. V.S.Vitko the state or municipal contract qualifies it directly as the contract of the order [139]. However the revealed differences of the contract of the author's order and product creation under the state or municipal contract do not allow to agree with this conclusion.

At definition of an accessory of the exclusive right to the product created under the state or municipal contract for the state or municipal needs, it is necessary to be guided by norms of item 1298 GK the Russian Federation. Under the general rule the exclusive right to product of a science, the literature or the art, created under the state or municipal contract belongs to the executor who is the author if by the state or municipal contract it is not provided, that this right belongs to the Russian Federation, the subject of the Russian Federation or municipal union. Possibility of joint possession is supposed by the exclusive right to product of a science, literatures of the executor and public formation.

Besides the contract of the author's order of product of a science, the literature, art can be created within the limits of the order contract (item 1296 GK the Russian Federation). In the edition operating till October, 1st, 2014 of a rule of item 1296 GK the Russian Federation extended only on creation of the computer programs and databases. With Federal act acceptance «About modification of parts of the first, second both fourth Civil code of the Russian Federation and separate acts of the Russian Federation» [140] norms of the contract of the order extend on the relations connected with creation not only the computer programs and databases, but also other products. Certainly specified innovation expands sphere of application of the contract of the order.

In spite of the fact that both the contract of the author's order and the order contract to name directed on creation of products it is possible following distinctions between these contractual designs.

First, the main difference of the contract of the author's order from the products created by request, is the subject structure. As it was marked earlier, the physical person which creative activity creates product can be the author under the contract of the author's order only. The executor under the order contract is the legal body. In this case, as it is fairly marked in the legal literature, the worker of the executor creating object of the copyright within the limits of the office task [141] can be the author, for example. The legislator in item 5 of item 1296 GK has established the Russian Federation, that the order contract does not extend on dogovory in which the contractor (executor) is the author products (article 1288). Therefore it is impossible to qualify relations on creation of product with the executor - the legal body as the relations arising from the contract of the author's order.

Secondly, the contract of the author's order is settled by product creation. In case of transfer of exclusive rights it is necessary to apply norms about the contract on alienation of exclusive rights or the licence contract. In the order contract the presumption of is established that the exclusive right to the product created under the contract creation of such product was which subject, belongs to the customer.

Thirdly, unlike the products created by request, for the contract of the author's order the legislator provides a rule about granting to the author of the additional period of grace lasting the one fourth part of the term established for execution of a contract. This term is given to the author at necessity and in the presence of reasonable excuses for end of creation of product.

Fourthly, in case of default or inadequate execution of a contract of the author's order concerning the author limited liability in the form of compensation of a real damage is provided. In case of infringement of obligations by the executor under the order contract general provisions on civil responsibility are applied. Hence, from the executor it is possible to claim damages in the form of a real damage and the loss of profit, not - ustojku. Thus unlike the contract of the author's order the executor (legal body) under the order contract bears responsibility on the basis of risk, i.e. without a condition about fault presence.

Thus, it is necessary to delimit the contract of the author's order from the products created under the order (the order contract).

Addressing to consideration of a parity of the contract of the author's order and office product, we will stop on concept definition «office product».

According to item 1295 GK the Russian Federation copyrights to product of a science, the literature or the art created in limits, the labour duties established for the worker (author) (office product), belong to the author. Taking into account the given definition, in civil law theories, office product it is understood as the product created by the worker in connection with performance of the labour duties or the concrete task of the employer [142]. R.A.Gursky considers office product as a non-material product of creative activity of the author, created as performance of the office task by the concrete worker (author) within the labour function established for it taken by it up under the employment contract, and representing system of concepts and the images expressed in the objective form accessible to perception [143]. Similar judgements are stated also by other authors [144].

From the stated follows, that as office product the products which creation concerns labour duties of the worker can be considered only. Besides, in the decision of Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation № 5, Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation № 29 from March, 26th, 2009 it is underlined, that for that definition, whether is created the worker under the concrete task of the employer product office, it is necessary to investigate a question on, whether this task entered into limits of labour duties of the worker. If such task of the employer was not included into its labour duties, the created product cannot be considered as office, i.e. the exclusive right to it belongs to the worker, its use by the employer probably only on the basis of the separate agreement with the worker and under condition of payment to it voznagrazh - denija [145].

Legal regulation of creation and execution of office product is carried out both norms of civil law, and norms of the law of master and servant, on what was repeatedly specified in scientific works [146].

Hence, the contract of the author's order has similarity to legal relations on creation of office products as in both cases there is a time rupture between occurrence of legal relations and occurrence of creative result. In the given situations as some scientists mark, arise and employment contracts of the author's order, employment contracts on creation of office products [147] operate. Besides, personal realisation of labour function pulls together the employment contract and the contract of the author's order. Product under the contract of the author's order is valid is created personally by the author, the same as also office product, the worker (author).

At the same time it is necessary to specify and in distinctions between the products created in limits, the labour duties established for the worker and under the contract of the author's order.

First, to spend otgranichenie one contract from another it is possible in its subject. Office products are created within the limits of the employment contract, which subject, according to item 56 of the Labour code of the Russian Federation, realisation by the worker of its labour function [148] is (instead of creation of certain product), and also fulfilment of actions of the parties arising in connection with the subsequent transfer of product to the customer is simple. Hence, the worker is obliged to perform work throughout a long time interval during which it is created one or several objects of the copyright, thus under the employment contract he submits to rules of the internal labour schedule and is guided by duty regulations. The organisation of performance of work lays on the employer. In the contract of the author's order as truly marks L. Century Sorokin, the operating mode of the author over product creation is in many respects defined by presence of author's inspiration and practically is not subject to the control, but substantially depends on the author and its interest in achievement of creative result in the terms adjusted in the contract [149].

Secondly, under the general rule the exclusive right to office product belongs to the employer, and the exclusive right to the product created under the contract of the order, initially belongs to the author.

Thirdly, relations of the employer and the worker within the limits of creation of office product always carry vozmezdnyj character, and the contract of the author's order can be as vozmezdnym, and gratuitous.

Fourthly, the employment contract consists for uncertain term, except cases, statutory. The contract of the author's order has urgent character. According to item 1289 GK the Russian Federation the contract which does not provide and does not allow to define term of its execution, it is not considered the prisoner.

Considering the specified circumstances, it is necessary to discriminate the office products created within the limits of the employment contract, and the products created under the contract of the author's order. At the same time it is frequent in practice difficult products it is created by collective of authors (directors, script writers, composers) within the limits of office tasks and contracts of the author's order [150].

In case of transfer to the customer of exclusive rights to the product created under the contract of the author's order positions about the contract on alienation of the exclusive right or the licence contract are applied. Thereupon there is a logical question: whether the contract of the author's order is mixed?

According to item 3 of item 421 GK the Russian Federation the mixed contract is a contract in which elements of various contracts contain, statutory or other legal acts.

In the civil literature also it is noticed, that the concept «the mixed contract» includes elements (a subject and other essential conditions) different contracts. The contract does not admit mixed if contains elements not several, and one contract [151]. It is necessary to agree with M.I.Braginskim that as elements of different contracts it is necessary to understand not the separate rights and duties, and their set which ha - rakterna for the given contract [152]. A.I.Bychkov fairly notices, that some elements of the contract to external signs can have similarity to other contract, but it does not give the bases to consider its mixed as data dogovory are allocated in a separate kind or type, and own subject and regulation [153] have the main thing.

V.A.Hohlov notices, that the contract of the author's order as a rule, includes a condition about granting of separate powers on use of product or about exclusive right alienation. The given conditions contradict nothing, but change qualification of the contract in this connection the contract of the author's order becomes mixed [154]. The similar opinion is in prison the research centre of private law [155], and also in works And. V.Evstafevoj [156], P.V.Krasheninnikov [157].

Qualification of the contract of the author's order as mixed is denied by S. TH. S.Chapanovym on the ground that conditions about granting of separate powers on use of product or about exclusive right alienation are necessary for the contract of the author's order and, hence, such contract has no character mixed dogo - the thief [158].

As it was specified earlier, the subject of the contract of the author's order is settled by product creation. Transfer of exclusive rights does not join in a subject of the investigated contract. It is impossible to disagree with L.A.Novoselovoj that, for example, from the contract on exclusive right alienation, as a rule, arises two vzaimoobuslovlennyh obligations - obja -

zatelstvo to transfer the exclusive right and the obligation to make counter-execution (to pay compensation) [159]. Therefore in case of need transfers of exclusive rights to the created product along with the contract of the author's order probably conclusion of separately licence contract or the contract on exclusive right alienation. Thus, the contract of the author's order and the licence contract (or the contract on exclusive right alienation) act as independent dogovory. The purpose of the contract of the author's order consists in product creation, and the licence contract (or contracts on exclusive right alienation) in transfer to the customer of exclusive rights to product. The conclusion of the uniform contract containing conditions about creation of corresponding product, together with about transfer of exclusive rights to it is besides, possible. The contract admits mixed as will contain elements of two independent contracts this situation, i.e. the licence contract (or contracts on exclusive right alienation) and contracts of the author's order.

Owing to rather-legal analysis of the contract of the author's order and adjacent civil-law institutes it is possible to draw a conclusion that the contract of the author's order is independent grazhdanskopravovym the contract. First of all, it speaks presence at the contract of the author's order of the subject. Other criteria for otgranichenija contracts of the author's order from other contracts have been besides, offered also.

Important value gets division of the systematising phenomena into groups. Correct formalisation of the systematised phenomenon allows to designate precisely its place in system. The result to which the parties aspire, causes various elements of regulation, and first of all, the rights and the duties reflecting the purpose of legal relation. JU. V.Roma-nets obosnovanno notices, that priority value of a sign is directed - nosti for result achievement expressed that he, predetermining most contract essential elements, an essence of its maintenance, allows to generate a uniform basis for regulation of all legal relations characterised by an identical orientation [160].

As is known, in the legal literature all civil-law dogovory is offered to be divided by criterion of result into certain groups. Interest represents definition of a place of the contract of the author's order in the given classification. It is classically accepted to divide dogovory by criterion of an orientation of result into four groups: 1) on assignation; 2) on performance of works; 3) on rendering of services; 4) on establishment of formations [161]. However division of contracts into four groups is insufficient. In particular, not in one of the offered groups it is impossible to include the contract of the author's order. So, is inadmissible to include contracts of the author's order in group of contracts on performance of works because of realisation by the author of creative activity. The licence contract and the contract on exclusive right alienation also cannot be included in the offered groups.

After V.V. Vitrjansky has suggested to allocate dogovory about alienation of exclusive rights to objects of intellectual property and about according a right of use of objects of intellectual property in separate (it is obvious the fifth) group of contracts [162]. V.S.Vitko agrees with V.V. Vitrjansky about necessity of allocation of separate (fifth) group of contracts by criterion of an orientation of result. At the same time V.S.Vitko offers the excellent name of this group: «... dogovory, directed on granting of the rights of use of objects of intellectual property» [163]. Similar reasons contain in I.A.Bojtsova's work [164].

Supporting necessity of increase in groups of contracts on a result orientation, in the group offered by scientists, unfortunately, there is no place for the contracts directed on creation of product.

And. V.Zakrzhevskoj is proved necessity of allocation of new (fifth) group of the contracts directed on creation and (or) transfer of results of intellectual activity [165]. In the given offer transfer of results of intellectual activity sees doubtful. The matter is that according to item 4 of item 129 GK the Russian Federation results of intellectual activity and the means of an individualization equal to them cannot be alienated or different ways to pass from one person to another. However the rights to such results and means, and also material carriers in which corresponding results or means are expressed, can be alienated or different ways to pass from one person to another in cases and is perfectly in order, which are established GK the Russian Federation. Therefore in the contract of the author's order it is necessary to speak not about transfer of the product created under the contract, and on transfer of the material carrier in which product is expressed. Transfer of product to other form (for example, by phone) is besides, possible.

Taking into consideration stated, it is possible to offer allocation of the following fifth group of contracts on a result orientation - dogovory, directed on creation of objects of intellectual property and on alienation of exclusive rights to objects of intellectual property or on according a right of use of objects of intellectual property. The offered name of new group of contracts it is considered by the universal. In particular, in the given group it is possible to allocate dogovory on creation of objects of intellectual property. The analysis IV ch. GK the Russian Federation allows to speak about expansion of those forms of contractual designs by means of which objects of intellectual property can be created: the contract of the author's order (item 1288 GK the Russian Federation); the products created under the order (item 1296 GK the Russian Federation); the products created at performance of works under the contract (item 1297 GK the Russian Federation); the products created under the state or municipal contract (item 1298 GK the Russian Federation). It is necessary to include in considered group and dogovory, directed on alienation of the exclusive right to objects of intellectual property, and also dogovory, uses of objects of intellectual property directed on according a right. Hence, the offered group covers all dogovory in copyright sphere.

The revealed characteristic signs of the contract of the author's order allow to draw following conclusions.

The contract of the author's order is an independent kind grazhdanskopravovogo the contract concerning according to classification of contracts by criterion of result to group of contracts, the objects of intellectual property directed on creation and on alienation of exclusive rights to objects of intellectual property or on according a right of use of objects of intellectual property.

In GK the Russian Federation does not contain special rules about the form of the contract of the author's order. Necessity of inclusion for item 1288 GK the Russian Federation rules about the obligatory written form of the contract of the author's order is proved. Non-observance of the written form should attract invalidity of the investigated contract.

<< | >>
A source: Belousov Vladimir Nikolaevich. the CONTRACT of the AUTHOR'S ORDER In CIVIL LAW of Russia. The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Irkutsk - 2018. 2018

More on topic § 3. DIFFERENCES OF THE CONTRACT OF THE AUTHOR'S ORDER FROM ADJACENT CIVIL-LAW TRANSACTIONS:

  1. Belousov Vladimir Nikolaevich. the CONTRACT of the AUTHOR'S ORDER In CIVIL LAW of Russia. The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Irkutsk - 2018, 2018
  2. § 1. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CUSTOMER AND THE AUTHOR UNDER THE CONTRACT OF THE AUTHOR'S ORDER
  3. § 1. CONCEPT AND THE LEGAL CHARACTERISTIC OF THE CONTRACT OF THE AUTHOR'S ORDER
  4. THE CHAPTER III. THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PARTIES UNDER THE CONTRACT OF THE AUTHOR'S ORDER. THE BASES OF REDUCTION AND CONDONATION OF THE AUTHOR
  5. § 1. THE PARTIES OF THE CONTRACT OF THE AUTHOR'S ORDER
  6. § 2. THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF THE PARTIES UNDER THE CONTRACT OF THE AUTHOR'S ORDER
  7. THE CHAPTER I. GENERAL PROVISIONS ON THE CONTRACT OF THE AUTHOR'S ORDER
  8. THE CHAPTER II. THE PARTIES AND THE MAINTENANCE OF THE OBLIGATIONS RELATIONS FOLLOWING FROM THE CONTRACT OF THE AUTHOR'S ORDER
  9. § 1. The contract on development of the built up territory as the civil-law contract
  10. Chapter 1. Not TAKEN place TRANSACTIONS In the CIVIL-LAW DOCTRINE