Abstract
The author critically assesses the expediency of constructing the concept of so-called related contracts, which should unite into a single group all subcontracts, i.e. contracts, the conclusion of which is based on an existing contract with other subjects. The author shows that there are very few similarities between all the subcontracts named in the law, while the differences are numerous. Based on the study of the named subcontracts, the author identifies the specificity of subcontracts depending on which party they arose, what right, benefit, work or service is performed under them, what is the economic purpose of such contracts. The author identifies the possibility and limits of applying the analogy of law to fill the gaps of legal regulation in respect of subcontracts.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
