On the Issue of Improving the Stay of Enforcement of Obligations

. Improving the institution of stay of enforcement of obligations is one of the urgent problems in modern civil law. The need to reform this institution is relevant as in the context of the coronavirus pandemic and forced self-isolation many organizations of trade, public catering, provision of household services and others are forced to suspend their work in connection with the introduced regime of anti-epidemic measures. Due to the lack of income, these organizations often find themselves in a situation where they cannot fulfill a number of obligations, primarily obligations arising from the lease agreement. The purpose of the study is to consider the features of the

institution of stay of enforcement of obligations, to analyze the adequacy of this institution in the new conditions and to suggest ways to improve it. To achieve this goal, the author uses the following methods: analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, formal-legal approach. In the course of the study, it was found that in the new conditions, in particular in connection with the spread of coronavirus infection, it is necessary to reform the institution of stay of enforcement of obligations. The reform of this institution should be aimed at expanding the grounds for stay of enforcement of obligations, including by introducing such grounds as suspending the activities of an organization based on a decision of state authorities or local self-government bodies. In this case, the obligations of the specified organization are considered suspended until the resumption of its activities. It seems that this institution of stay of enforcement of obligations makes it possible to account the interests of both the creditor and the debtor, and therefore, in our opinion, is an effective institution for regulating private relations.

1. Agarkov MM. Izbrannye trudy po grazhdanskomu pravu: v 2 t. [Selected works on civil law: in 2 vols.]. Moscow: Yurinfor; 2002. Vol. 1. (In Russ.)

2. Anson V. Dogovornoe pravo [Contract law]. Moscow; 1984. (In Russ.)

3. Atamanchuk GV. Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie (organizatsionno-funktsionalnye voprosy): uchebnik [Public administration (organizational and functional issues): A textbook]. Moscow; 2000. (In Russ.)

4. Belykh VS. Dogovornoe pravo nglii: sravnitelno-pravovoe issledovanie: monografiya [Contract law in England: Comparative legal research. Monograph]. Moscow: Prospekt; 2017. (In Russ.)

5. Vavilin EV. Printsipy grazhdanskogo prava. Mekhanizm osushchestvleniya i zashchity grazhdanskikh prav Ezhegodnik grazhdanskogo prava [Civil Law Principles. Mechanism for the implementation and protection of civil rights]. Saratov; 2012. (In Russ.)

6. Voronov AF. Printsipy grazhdanskogo protsessa: proshloe, nastoyashchee, budushchee [Principles of civil procedure: past, present, and future]. Moscow; 2009. (In Russ.)

7. Grazhdanskoe ulozhenie Germanii: Vvodnyy zakon k Grazhdanskomu ulozheniyu [The Civil Code of Germany: Introductory law to the Civil Code]. Trans. from German. Introduction by V. Bergmann. 3rd ed., rev. Moscow: Volters Kluwer; 2008. (In Russ.)

8. Gribanov VP. Printsipy osushchestvleniya grazhdanskikh prav [Principles of civil rights implementation]. In: Osushchestvlenie i zashchita grazhdanskikh prav [Exercise and protection of civil rights]. Moscow; 2000. (In Russ.)

9. Ermolova ON. Sotsialnye aspekty predprinimatelskoy deyatelnosti [Social Aspects of Entrepreneurship]. Aktualnye problemy rossiyskogo prava. 2018;11:74-80. (In Russ.)

10. Karapetov AG. Priostanovlenie ispolneniya obyazatelstva kak sposob zashchity prav kreditora [Stay of performance of the obligation as a way to protect the rights of the creditor]. Moscow: Statut; 2011. (In Russ.)

11. Lopatin S. Priostanovlenie ispolneniya vstrechnogo obyazatelstva [Stay of execution of a counter-obligation]. EZH-Yurist. 2017;27. (In Russ.)

12. Mikhaylov AV. Perspektivy razvitiya zakonodatelstva o predprinimatelskoy deyatelnosti v usloviyakh tsifrovoy ekonomiki [Prospects for the development of legislation on entrepreneurship in the digital economy]. Predprinimatelskoe pravo. Prilozhenie «Pravo i biznes» [Business law. Addendum "Law and Business"]. 2019;3:7-(In Russ.)

13. Nadezhin NN. Printsipy pravovogo regulirovaniya predprinimatelskoy deyatelnosti [Principles of legal regulation of entrepreneurial activity]. Yurist [Jurist]. 2019;8:33-38. (In Russ.)

14. Osipov MYu. O vozmozhnosti kodifikatsii predprinimatelskogo prava [On the possibility of codification of business law]. Pravo i ekonomika [Law and Economics]. 2014;7(317):76-79. (In Russ.)

15. Otcheskaya TI. Obespechenie prokuraturoy i sudami svobody ekonomicheskoy deyatelnosti [Ensuring the freedom of economic activity by the Prosecutor’s Office and the courts]. Zakony Rossii: opyt, analiz, praktika [Laws of Russia: Experience, analysis, practice]. 2018;6:70-74. (In Russ.)

16. Afanasyeva EG, Belitskaya AV, Vaypan VA, et al. Predprinimatelskoe pravo Rossii: itogi, tendentsii i puti razvitiya: monografiya [Business Law of Russia: Results, trends and ways of development. Monograph]. Moscow: Yustitsinform; 2019. (In Russ.)

17. Semenov VM. Konstitutsionnye printsipy grazhdanskogo sudoproizvodstva [Constitutional principles of civil legal proceedings]. Moscow; 1982. (In Russ.)

18. Khokhlov VA. Obshchie polozheniya ob obyazatelstvakh: uchebnoe posobie [General provisions on obligations: A textbook]. Moscow: Statut; 2015. (In Russ.)

19. Mangan M, Lim L, Elvidge M, Gaw D, Mitra A,Chen Sh. COVID-19: Suspension of Contractual Rights and Obligations in Singapore (and Possibly Soon Elsewhere). Available from: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=1ee7228e-7e5f-49b8-94d1-24109edd28d4 [cited 2020 Jun 19]. (In Eng.)

20. Marsh PD V. Comparative Contract Law. England, France, Germany. Gower; 1996. (In Eng.)

21. Nicholas B. The French Law of Contract. Oxford; 2003. (In Eng.)

22. O’Neill P, Saaf N. Is the Exceptio Non Adimpleti Contractus Part of the New Lex Mercatoria? Transnational Rules in International Commercial Arbitration (ICC Publ.). Paris; 1993. (In Eng.)

23. Schulz F. Classic Roman Law. Oxford; 1951. (In Eng.)

24. Treitel GH. Remedies for Breach of Contract. A Comparative Account. Oxford; 1988. (In Eng.)