Future of the Euromortgage conceptPart 1: Solutions in selected European countries

Since the 1960s, there has been discussion regarding the introduction of a flexible real estate pledge law in Europe that could serve to ensure security above all for cross-border loans. Although this issue is not currently undergoing detailed analysis, due to a number of significant changes in variousEuropean legislations, including in Polish law, anticipating new solutions in mortgage law, it is worth considering anew whether they and which ones might constitute a possible model for future security in rem in European Union law. The first section of the article outlines the historical background of solutions breaking with the Roman model of accessory pledge rights, and presents a few selected modern mortgage systems, in which there has been a significant departure from the principle of pendency of collateral security on real estate above all the German, Slovenia, Swiss, French, Estonian and Hungarian systems. Slovenian practice may be taken as an example of solutions that have not worked out in practice due to abuses related to the establishing of a non-accessory pledge right to the detriment of creditors seeking the satisfaction of other debts from the property of the owner of the encumbered property

Civil FruitsPart I – General issues, natural fruits from a thing

In the Polish Civil Code of 1964, civil fruits, referred to in some other European legislation as"fruits" (following the model of Roman law - fructus) have been regulated in a manner similarto that adopted in the German Civil Code of 1896. However, in contrast to the German doctrine,this issue has not received an in-depth analysis in Polish literature so far, but has onlybeen mentioned basically in textbooks and short commentaries.The purpose of this article is to present the key issues concerning the legal category of "fruits"in Polish civil law with a historical and comparative background. Due to the far-reaching similarityto the German regulation, significant differences resulting from the different specificregulations in the Polish Code of 1964 compared to those adopted by the German legislatorare also presented.In the first part of the analysis, in addition to general historical and comparative remarks,fundamental issues concerning the general concept of "fruits" and the divisions adopted bothin the Code and in legal science are presented. Significant problems are also presented concerningthe key category of so-called natural benefits of things, which are also referred to as"direct fruits" in German literature. These are the benefits that accrue directly to the ownerfrom the thing. He or she is, so to speak, the 'primary' person entitled to the benefits that thething that belongs to him or her brings. The subjective scope distinguishes this category fromother benefits that the thing may produce (also in the form of tangible goods "born" by thething), which are referred to as "benefits (or fruits) of right." This term is related not so much tothe legal nature of the benefit itself as an object of law but rather to the fact that the basis forderiving a particular benefit is a subjective right (other than ownership, e.g., usufruct or lease).Detailed further subdivisions shall be presented in the second part of the pape