ABOUT THE LIMITATION OF JOINT SECURITY OF CREDITORS, AS REGULATED BY THE CIVIL CODE

Transcription

1 ABOUT THE LIMITATION OF JOINT SECURITY OF CREDITORS, AS REGULATED BY THE CIVIL CODE Teaching assistant Ioana Cristina PANŢU, Ph.D. candidate Romanian-American University Abstract The debtor s patrimony is the joint security of creditors, but in the event of the patrimony s separation, the law stipulates the rule of specialization as regards the order of the assets pursuit from various separate patrimonies. In certain cases, the security is limited to a certain patrimony or separated patrimonies and the specialization strengthens. Moreover, the security, even if in theory concerns all the goods of the debtor, some of them are excluded from forfeiture either under the law or under contracts. Keywords: creditor, joint security, patrimony, separate patrimonies The concept of security. Joint security of creditors By securing the fulfillment of obligations, it is understood all the legal means, respectively rights and actions, granted by the law or contracts, whose exercise secure the execution of the receivable rights 1. These are classified as general and special means and those from the first class are enjoyed by all creditors, both those who enjoy a cause of preference and unsecured creditors, based on the general security of creditors represented by the debtor s patrimony. The general means are further separated into preservation and remedy rights and the first category encloses: the right to ask for division of inheritance 2, the right of the inheritance s creditors to be paid for the assets in tenancy 3, the right to ask for precautionary measures over the debtor s assets or forfeiture, the right to perform certain publicity procedures. Remedy rights include paulian action 4, direct actions 5, 1 M.N. Costin, C.M. Costin, Dicţionar de drept civil de la A la Z, 2 nd edition, Ed. Hamangiu, Bucharest, 2007, p Following the corroboration of art paragraph 2 with art. 67 paragraph 1 of the Civil code, the separation of goods can be asked by the creditors of an heir. 3 If the inheritance is accepted (art paragraph 2 of the Civil Code), the sole patrimony of the heir includes, until the settlement of the inheritance liability, two types of goods with separate legal regime: the assets in their patrimony until the opening of the succession and the inheritance assets. 4 We use the terminology of paulian action because to cancel means in the current language to annul, to abrogate, to call off and the cancelation, as punishment of the civil code, is the restriction of liberties following the ingratitude of the beneficiary or faulty non-fulfillment of an obligation. Moreover, the term is also used for unilateral cancelation or termination of a contract. See G. Boroi, L. Stănciulescu, Instituţii de drept civil în reglementarea noului Cod civil, Ed. Hamangiu, Bucharest, 2012, p.208. And, the effect if such action is admitted is unenforceability towards the creditors filing this action and who intervene in the case. L. Pop, Tratat de drept civil. Obligaţiile, vol. I, Regimul juridic general sau Fiinţa obligaţiilor civile, Ed. C.H. Beck, Bucharest, 2006, p See I. Adam, Drept civil. Obligaţiile. Contractul, Ed. C.H. Beck, Bucharest, 2011, p ; L. Pop, I.-Fl. Popa, S.I. Vidu, Tratat elementar de drept civil. Obligaţiile, Ed. Universul Juridic, Bucharest, 2012, p ; C. Stătescu, C. Bîrsan, Drept civil. Teoria generală a obligaţiilor, Ed. Hamangiu, Bucharest,

2 action against simulation 6. Art of the Civil Code, generally called Joint security of creditors, stipulates in paragraph 1 as follows: The person who personal liability is bound is liable for all their movable and immovable assets, present and future. They serve as joint security of their creditors. Thus, the analysis of this security is made related to the concept of patrimony, the law indicating in the aforementioned text goods movable and immovable, present and future but, also, the creditors of the same debtor, respectively related to their rights and obligations. The Civil Code, in art. 31 paragraph 1, stipulates: A natural or legal person is owner of a patrimony, which includes all the rights and obligations which can be assessed in money and belong to such person. This definition starts from the opinion formulated by the doctrine prior to its entering into force 7. The people who enjoy this joint security are the creditors, including the unsecured creditors, those who do not enjoy a cause of preference, respectively a pledge, lien or mortgage (art of the Civil Code) as regards their receivable. This security concerns the debtor s patrimony and not certain customized goods from their patrimony. Of course, the settlement of a receivable does not involve the pursuit of all the debtor s goods, but will concern only individually determined goods from the debtor s patrimony when the receivable is executed 8. However, we have to point out that art of the Civil code does not stipulate this concept of unsecured creditors, but the solution chosen by the lawmaker to include creditors in general appears as natural considering that those who enjoy a cause of preference can exercise or not their right granted by the law and, in some cases, they can become, at least for part of their receivable, unsecured creditors, respectively if their receivable is not entirely settled after the pursuit of the asset(s) 9. Legal restrictions Types of goods which are not object of the joint security of creditors As regards the concept of present and future goods from art of the Civil code, it has been indicated that object of pursuit can be the goods existing in the debtor s patrimony when the receivable is settled and those which existed when the receivable occurred, but also those which will be part of the patrimony after this time 10. Thus, the first general restriction on the joint security of the creditors is that there cannot be 2008, p. 92; M. Ioan, Acţiunile directe în reglementarea noului Cod civil, în Valahia University Law Study no. 2/2012, vol. XX, p For the French doctrine, see for instance, Fr. Terre, Ph. Smiler, Y. Lequette, Droit civil. Les obligations, Dalloz, Paris, 2005, p ; C. Larroumet, Droit civil. Les obligations. Le contrat, tome III, Economica, Paris, 2003, p M.N. Costin, C.M. Costin, op. cit., p See, for instance, C. Hamangiu, I. Rosetti-Bălănescu, Al. Băicoianu, Tratat de drept civil român, Restitutio, vol. I, Ed. All Beck, Bucharest, 1996, p. 522; L. Pop, Dreptul de proprietate şi dezmembrămintele sale, Ed. Lumina Lex, Bucharest, 1996, p. 7; C. Bîrsan, Drept civil. Drepturile reale principale, 3 rd edition revised and supplemented, Ed. Hamangiu, Bucharest, 2008, p. 6; V. Stoica, Drept civil. Drepturi reale principale, Ed. C.H. Beck, Bucharest, 2013, p. 7-8; M. Ioan, Drept civil. Drepturile reale principale, Ed. Pro Universitaria, Bucharest, 2011, p C. Bîrsan, op. cit., p In this respect, art C. civ. indicates that the debtor remains personally liable for the part of the receivable which is not covered by the price obtained from the sale of the pledged asset. 10 C. S. J., joint sections, decision no. 4/1998, in Curtea Supremă de Justiţie Buletinul jurisprudenţei. Culegere de decizii pe anul 1998, Ed. Argessis, Curtea de Argeş, 1999, p ; V. Stoica, op. cit., p

3 pursued the goods which, on the pursuit s moment, did not enter the patrimony or those which exited the patrimony 11. The second restriction of the joint security of creditors is stipulated by paragraph 2 of art of the Civil Code, which indicates that inalienable goods cannot make object of the general security of creditors, irrespective if their inalienability is granted by the law or contracts 12. For instance, the inalienable goods are the goods in public property (art. 861 C.civ.) 13, the right of housing of the surviving spouse (art. 973 paragraph 2 C.civ.), support under a contract (art C.civ.), and any other right which is strictly persona, such as the right to legal support. Alienable, but indefeasible goods are, as per art.726 NCPC: personal or household goods indispensable for the living of the debtor and their family and objects of cult if there aren t many of the same type: objects indispensable to disabled people and those for caring for sick people; food for the debtor and their family for 3 months and if the debtor s business is agriculture exclusively, the food required until the new crop, the animals needed to obtain existence means and the food necessary for these animals until the new crop; the fuel necessary for the debtor and their family for 3 months of winter; personal or family letters, photos and paintings and the like; goods considered non-pursuable by the law. In its turn, paragraph 2 of art of the Civil Code, stipulates that all the goods which are, according to the law, unalienable are indefeasible. The solution is justified by the fact that any good that is alienable and, thus, it cannot be alienated, cannot be object of enforced execution as it implies alienation. Therefore, the question which is the meaning of the phrase are they, according to the law, unalienable? Because inalienability can be under the law or under contract and thus, are there concerned only the goods indicated by the law as unalienable or those whose inalienability is set under a contract? The solution is given by art. 629 paragraph 3 of the Civil Code which stipulates that the goods decided unalienable cannot be pursued as long as the clause is effective if the law does not stipulate otherwise. In this respect, we consider that the wording should have been they are unalienable according to the law. The law (art of the Civil Code) allows for the goods to be considered indefeasible under contract, under the same conditions as the clauses of inalienability. Thus the conditions on the clauses of inalienability or indefeasibility are: - The clause must be stipulated under contract or will (art. 627 paragraph 1 of the Civil Code) and no person can seize an asset in their patrimony by unilateral legal writ. - To declare the asset unalienable or indefensible can be done for maximum 49 years from the moment of its procurement; - The existence of a serious interest actual and lawful licit and moral C. Hamangiu, I. Rosetti-Bălănescu, Al. Băicoianu, op. cit., 1928, p. 850; P.M. Cosmovici, Drept civil. Drepturi reale. Obligaţiile. Legislaţie, Ed. All Beck, Bucharest, 1996, p Fl. Baias, E. Chelaru, R. Constantinovici, I. Macovei (coord.), Noul Cod civil. Comentariu pe articole. Art , Ed. C.H. Beck, Bucharest, 2012, p See art.120, paragraph 2 of the Law no.215/1990 on local public administration (republished in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 123/February 10, 2007, as further amended and supplemented) according to which the goods part of the public property of local interest are inalienable and indefeasible goods. Equally, art. 5 paragraph 2 of the Land Law no. 18/1991 (republished in the O.G. no. 1/January 5, 1998, as further amended and supplemented) stipulates that lands part of the public property are inalienable and indefeasible. 14 Fl. Baias, E. Chelaru, R. Constantinovici, I. Macovei (coord.), op. cit., p

4 Joint security of creditors and the division of the debtor s patrimony Paragraph 2 of art. 31 of the Civil Code stipulates that the patrimony can make object of a separation or affectation 15 only according to the law and paragraph 3 lists the patrimonies of affectation: fiduciary patrimonies, those used to exercise a certified profession and other patrimonies set by the law. Thus, the patrimony, even if unique, can be divided or can make object of the operation to set a patrimony of affectation, leading to several patrimonies including both rights and obligations patrimonies with different legal regimes depending on the purpose of such division 16. Given this requirement, the property subrogation of universal title operates for each patrimony for the fulfillment of this goal and their actual existence is subordinated to the purpose, being, thus, limited in time 17. Art. 32 of the Civil Code regulates inter-patrimony transfer, which is not alienation because the transfer is made within the sole patrimony of the holder and not between two separate patrimonies. Thus, the existence of such division or affection is not equal to a lack of inter-patrimony communication because patrimony responsibility is partially limited to a certain patrimony, the creditors whose rights arise from it being able to pursue the other goods from the debtor s patrimony if their receivable is not settled with the goods from such patrimony and the disappearance of the purpose for which such patrimony is assigned involves the disappearance of the patrimony, keeping the elements in the general patrimony 18. The creditors must observe this order of pursuit, first the assets making object of the patrimony s division subject to receivable and then the other assets of the debtor (art paragraph 3 of the Civil Code). The inter-patrimony transfer must not affect the rights of the creditor over each smaller patrimony. The way to protect the creditors against various frauds is the paulian action, but in the case of the inter-patrimony transfer, it can be made by unilateral acts of the patrimony s holder (art C. civ.). Thus, according to art paragraph 1 of the Civil Code, if proves a damage, the creditor can ask for the legal documents concluded by the debtor against their rights to be declared non-opposable against them. As the aforementioned rule does not distinguish, the deeds to be challenged through the paulian action as the unilateral ones, irrespective of the provisions of paragraph 2 of the same articles, which sets some of the conditions of exercise in case of onerous contracts and, implicitly, of contracts free of charge, or those of art paragraph 2 of the Civil Code which refers to third parties. Moreover, the property subrogation of universal title ensures the divisibility of the patrimony in smaller ones with separate legal regime, hindering the transfer of assets from a group to another and thus, allowing, the continuation of the specialization of the 15 Both in the case of division and affectation in the same patrimony we have smaller patrimonies with spate legal regimes. For instance, in terms of division, we notice the case of spouses patrimony, the patrimony of the state or territorial units or the patrimony of the heir, which until the settlement of the inheritance liability, are two patrimonies with spate legal regime: the assets in their patrimony on the opening of the inheritance and the patrimony of the inheritance goods. In exchange, the patrimonies of affection are determined according to the law and from the two examples stipulated by paragraph 3 of art. 31 of the Civil Code, they are part of the sole patrimony of the sole patrimony of professionals, as defined in art. 3 paragraph 2 and 3 of the Civil Code. 16 C. Bîrsan, op. cit., p V. Stoica, op. cit., p V. Stoica, op. cit., p. 12.

5 creditor s general security 19, the newly entered assets replacing automatically the subrogated ones, acquiring the legal position enjoyed by the latter 20. General rule As a general rule, according to paragraph 2 of art of the Civil Code, the creditors whose receivables arise from a certain division of the patrimony, allowed by the law, must first pursue the assets making object of such smaller patrimony (1 st thesis) and if they are not enough to settle the receivables, the other assets of the debtor can be pursued (2 nd thesis). Thus, there is achieved the specialization of the joint security of the creditors 21, respectively if a receivable is mainly settled from such smaller patrimony 22. The security remains general because concerns a certain patrimony group and it is specialized because it is limited to the patrimony assets from such group 23. An application of this rule is regulated by art of the Civil Code. Thus, in the case of legal community, according to art. 339 of the Civil Code, the goods acquired by any of the spouses during marriage are, on their procurement, joint goods 24. As exception, they are personal goods even if acquired during marriage the goods listed by art. 340 of the Civil Code, respectively: a) goods acquired by legal inheritance, legate or donation, save for the case when the donor stipulates expressly that they will be joint goods; b) personal goods; c) goods required for the exercise of the profession of one of the spouses if they are not part of a stock in trade part of asset community; d) patrimony rights of intellectual property over their creations and distinctive registered signs; e) goods received as awards or rewards, literary or scientific manuscripts, drawings and artistic projects, inventions and the like; f) insurance premiums and compensations for any moral or material damage caused to any of the spouses; g) goods, money or other valuables replacing a personal asset and the asset acquired in exchange; h) the benefits of personal goods. Moreover, there are personal obligations and joint obligations of the spouses. Thus, according to art. 351 of the Civil Code, joint debts of the spouses are: a) obligations arising from the preservation, administration and procurement of joint assets; b) obligations undertaken together; c) obligations undertaken by any of the spouses to cover regular marriage-related costs; d) remedy of damage caused by the appropriation by one of the spouses of the goods belonging to a third party if the joint goods of both spouses are thus enlarged. The pursuit of each patrimony of goods by the personal or joint creditors of the spouses will be made, with priority, over the patrimony giving rise to the receivable and 19 C. Bîrsan, op. cit., p Idem, p Idem, p V. Stoica, op. cit., p. 29; L. Pop, L. M. Harosa, Drept civil. Drepturile reale principale, Ed. Universul Juridic, Bucharest, 2006, p. 20; C. Bîrsan, op. cit., 2008, p L. Pop, op. cit., 1996, p To classify an asset as joint asset, two cumulative conditions must be met: the asset must have been acquired by any of the spouses during marriage and must not be part of the class of personal goods. See, E. Florian, Dreptul familiei, ed. a II-a, Ed. CH. Beck, Bucharest, 2008, p. 96. See M. Ioan, L. Maierean, Dreptul familiei, vol. I, Ed. Universitară, Bucharest, 2014, p. 185 and the works cited there.

6 only if such receivable has not been entirely settled, the other patrimonies will be pursued 25. The provisions of art. 352 and 353 of the Civil Code stipulate the imperative order 26 to pursue the spouses goods: - The personal creditor will first pursue the personal goods of the debtor spouse and if the receivable is not settled from them, they will ask for the division of the joint goods in court and, also the pursuit of the goods become personal goods of the debtor. The creditor cannot pursue the joint goods, such possibility equaling the obligation of the non-debtor spouse to make a payment they do not owe 27 ; - The joint creditor will first joint personal goods and not personal goods. If the receivable is not settled, the creditor can pursue the personal goods of each spouse and, in such case, the obligation of the spouses is joint and the joint creditor is entitled to pursue in such case any of the spouses for the full amount of the receivable 28. The situation of patrimonies of affectation regulated by the Civil Code Free lancers can assign part of their patrimony for the exercise of their profession, establishing a professional patrimony 29. Art paragraph 4 of the Civil Code stipulates that the assets part of a patrimony division and assigned to exercise a profession certified by the law can be pursued only by the creditors whose receivables arise from such profession, but these creditors cannot pursue the other assets of the debtor. In its turn, art. 727 NCPC the assets assigned to occupancy or profession, in paragraph 1, stipulates: the movable assets part of a patrimony division assigned to exercise a certified profession can be pursued only by the creditors whose receivables arise from such profession. If the goods are not transferred into an individual professional patrimony, but serve to exercise the occupancy or the profession of the debtor-natural person, can be pursued only if there aren t any other pursuable goods and only for maintenance obligations or other privileged receivables over properties. The 1 st thesis partially resumes the provisions of art paragraph 3 of the Civil Code while the 2 nd thesis stipulates the order of the pursuit. Thus a double restriction is emplaced. The goods from the patrimony assigned to exercise a profession certified by the law can be pursued only by the professional creditors and the goods outside this patrimony can be pursued only by the other creditors. This measure strengthens the specialization of the joint security of creditors and, thus, the debtor, by avoiding insolvability, and the professional and extra-professional creditors are protected while the creditors will not compete in pursuing the debtor s goods 30. Art. 151 of the Law no. 71/2011 for the enforcement of the Law no. 287/2009 on the Civil Code 31 stipulates that the provisions of art paragraph 4 of the Civil Code 25 M. Ioan, op. cit., 2011, p ; M. Ioan, L. Maierean, op. cit., p E. Florian, op. cit., p M. Ioan, L. Maierean, op. cit., p I. P. Filipescu, A. I. Filipescu, Tratat de dreptul familiei, Ed. All Beck, Bucharest, 2001, p. 161; E. Florian, op. cit., p E. Chelaru, Drept civil. Drepturile reale principale, ed. a III-a, Ed. C.H. Beck, Bucharest, 2009, p Fl. Baias, E. Chelaru, R. Constantinovici, I. Macovei (coord.), op. cit., p Published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 409/June 10, 2011, amended and supplemented.

7 applies to cases when the professional performs the patrimony division after the enactment of the code. As regards the concept of profession certified by the law, the Civil Code does not defines it, art. 3 paragraph 2 and 3 stipulating that professional are all those who perform an activity, respectively one or several people who systematically carry out an organized activity consisting of the production, administration or alienation of goods or render services, irrespective if they have a lucrative purpose or not. Following the wording certified by the law, it can be concluded that it speaks only about those people with professions under special regulations and who have a special qualification, as lawyers, notaries, accountants, bailiffs etc. 32 The class of people exercising liberal professions certified by the law does not include authorized natural people, individual enterprises or family enterprises because their economic activities do not involve obtaining special qualifications. Art. 2 letter (j) of the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 44/2008 on economic activities carried out by authorized natural people, individual enterprises or family enterprises 33 defines the patrimony of affectation all the goods, rights and obligations of the authorized person, holder of the individual enterprise or members of the family enterprise, assigned to the purpose for an economic activity, set as a distinct part of their patrimony, separate from the general pledge of their personal creditors. However, we cannot but notice the flagrant error from this regulation, respectively the wording goods, rights and obligations. As indicated in literature, indicating the patrimony s definition the goods object of the patrimony rights is not necessary or advisable given that patrimony rights are considered goods and all economic goods and obligations refer to tangible and intangible goods 34, the patrimony being an intellectual reality composed of intellectual elements, not only the tangible material goods and the inclusion of the goods doubles the economic value, misrepresenting the asset-liability relation 35. In conclusion, the patrimonies of affectation, divisions of patrimony include rights and obligations and, therefore, we suggest amending the regulation above by removing the term goods. In this case, as well, we encounter a specialization of the creditor s security, but its substantiation is the special law, not the regulations of the common law, respectively art paragraph 4 of the Civil Code. Thus, art. 20, 26 and 31 of the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 44/2008 stipulate that professional obligations are secured by the assets from the patrimony of affectation and, further, by the entire patrimony, as enforcement of art paragraph 3 of the Civil Code. Another situation where the specialization of the joint security is strengthened is regulated in the field of trust law. Art. 786 paragraph 1 of the Civil Code stipulates in this respect that the goods from the fiduciary patrimony can be pursued, according to the law, by the creditors of the receivables arising from these assets, ensuring thus the preservation of the patrimony of affectation. However, they cannot pursue the goods from other patrimonies save when the fiducial contract stipulates the obligation of the fiduciary and/or the settlor to be responsible for part or the entire liability of the 32 We speak about liberal professions, See V. Stoica, op. cit., p Published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 328/April 25, 2008, amended and supplemented. 34 I. Lulă, Unele probleme privind noţiunea de patrimoniu, in Dreptul nr. 1/1998, p. 14; O Ungureanu, C. Munteanu, Drept civil. Drepturi reale, Ed. Rosetti, Bucharest, 2005, p ; C. Bîrsan, op. cit., p V. Stoica, op. cit., p. 7-8.

8 fiduciary. Save for these creditors, the creditors of the settler, who have a security interest over their assets and whose opposability is acquired according to the law before the pledge can also pursue the goods, as well as any other creditors of the settler, only based on a final ruling to admit the claim by which the fiducial contract was terminated or became non-opposable, by any means, with retroactive effect. In conclusion, the goods that can be pursued by the holders of the receivables arising from the assets in the fiduciary patrimony are those from the fiduciary patrimony, they entering in competition with other creditors only by exception and only for the categories stipulated by art. 786 paragraph 2 of the Civil Code. As an exception, as well, in case of a stipulation in this respect, they can continue their pursuit of the rest of the fiduciary patrimony, but not of other goods from other fiduciary patrimonies, respectively the goods from the settlor s patrimony, at the extend and according to the order stipulated in the fiducial contract. Art. 776 paragraph 3 of the Civil Code stipulates that fiduciaries can be public notaries and lawyers, irrespective of the form they exercise their profession. In this case, the provisions of art paragraph 4 and art. 786 of the Civil Code must be corroborated. Thus, the holders of receivables arising from the assets of the fiducuiary patrimony will firstly pursue the goods from such patrimony and if there is a contractual clause in this respect, they can pursue the goods from the patrimony assigned for the profession s exercise. Contract limitations The limitation of the joint security can also be contractual. Thus, the mortgagee can waive the pursuit of the goods which are not pledged (art Civil Code). They cannot pursue the other goods of the debtor even if, pursuing the pledged asset, the receivable is not settled. This limitation can be enforced only contractually, by means of an agreement between the mortgagee and debtor, never unilaterally by the debtor, but this transforms the regulations from the field of general security of creditors into suppletive regulations 36. The mortgagee can however waive this exercise unilaterally, not being bound to exercise a right, which would be, in fact, a non-sense. As indicated above, the goods can be indefeasible under contract, in compliance with the validity requirements stipulated for clauses of inalienability, but in such case the agreement is between alienator and acquirer, not between creditor and debtor. Unlike the special inalienability stipulated by art of the Civil Code which is effective only for the creditors who allowed it, the inalienability stipulated by art of the Civil Code is opposable erga omnes, all creditors thus being third parties to the contract setting it, without understanding however that the asset is inalienable as well. REFERENCES 1. Bazin E., Le consentement du consommateur, ANTR, Lille, 1999; 2. Berlioz G., Droit de la consommation et droit des contrats, JCP, Paris, 1979; 3. Brun Ph., Le droit de revenir sur son engagement. Droit et patrimoine, Mai, Paris, 1998; 4. Calais-Auloy J., Droit de la consommation, Dalloz, Paris, 2003; 36 Fl. Baias, E. Chelaru, R. Constantinovici, I. Macovei (coord.), op. cit., p

9 5. Delebeque Ph., La formation de la vente entre profesionel et consommateur, R.J.Com., Paris, 1997; 6. Ferrier D., La protection du consommateur, Dalloz, Paris, 1996; 7. Four J., Aubert J.L., Savaux E., Les obligations. L acte juridique, edition XII, Sirey, Paris, 2006; 8. Goicovici J., Formarea progresivă a contractului, Wolters Kluwer Romania, Bucharest, 2009; 9. Kelsen, La theorie juridique de la convention, 1940; 10. Mazeaud L., Chabas Fr., Leçons de droit civil. obligations. Theorie generale, Montcrestien, Paris, 1998; 11. Mazeaud D., L atraction du droit de la consommation, în RTD com., Paris, 1998; 12. Picod Y., Davo H., Droit de la consommation, Armand Colin, Paris, 2005; 13. Pop L., Tratat de drept civil. Obligaţiile, vol. II, Contractul, Ed. Universul Juridic, Bucharest, 2009; 14. Terre Fr., Simler Ph., Lequette Yv., Droit civil. Les Obligations, Dalloz, Paris, 1999; 15. Vasilescu P., Un chip al postmodernismului recent: dreptul consumatorului, în Consumerismul contractual. Repere pentru o nouă teorie generală a contractelor de consum, Ed. Sfera Juridică, Cluj-Napoca, 2006.