A recent decision by the Supreme Court has overcome the inconsistencies of the classical jurisprudential position on the importance of the judge's relief of the voidness in case of request for termination. The pronunciation, however, has excluded from the scope of Art. 1421 c.c., the cases of voidness "special" on the implicit assumption of their ontological diversity and of the alleged different discipline, compared with the general scheme. The "method" logical-systematic and teleological-axiological reveals the fallacy of the classic dogmas on invalidity behind the recent solution; in particular the natural relativity of the voidness in codex and the homogeneity of the new hypotheses with respect to the normative concept both for what regards the grounds for invalidity "special" both for what concerns the discipline.
Rilievo officioso e nullità di protezione
RUSSO, DOMENICO
2015-01-01
Abstract
A recent decision by the Supreme Court has overcome the inconsistencies of the classical jurisprudential position on the importance of the judge's relief of the voidness in case of request for termination. The pronunciation, however, has excluded from the scope of Art. 1421 c.c., the cases of voidness "special" on the implicit assumption of their ontological diversity and of the alleged different discipline, compared with the general scheme. The "method" logical-systematic and teleological-axiological reveals the fallacy of the classic dogmas on invalidity behind the recent solution; in particular the natural relativity of the voidness in codex and the homogeneity of the new hypotheses with respect to the normative concept both for what regards the grounds for invalidity "special" both for what concerns the discipline.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
