THE DEMARCATION BETWEEN
JURIDICAL AND FACTUAL APPEARANCES
IN THE LIGHT OF A MISTAKE IN THE ESSENCE
OF AN AGREEMENT

​

M.M. PESTOV,
Second-Year Graduate Student, Russian School of Private Law

​

DOI: 10.24031/1992-2043-2020-20-2-124-175

​

In this article an attempt of comprehension is realized in regard to dividing law and facts in case of ignorance. The author leads an example of the rescission of a contract because of a mistake in the essence of an agreement (pp. 3 p. 2 Art. 178 of the Russian Civil Code). The dividing mistake in the essence of an agreement as its kind and mistake in the legal consequences is the possible but not the best solution of the mentioned problem. According to the authors opinion, the roots of this issue are based on the common theory of the ignorance of law (ignorancia iuris) what demands a deep historical analysis. Completed it the researcher reveals two forms of law: the explicit form reflecting positive legislative prescriptions and the implicit form consisted with a typical situation of interaction between persons which is not described directly by lawmaker but accepted with legal order. The developing of maxim “ignorantia iuris nocet” in the Middle Ages and the Early modern period have been gradully eliminating the difference between mistake in fact and mistake in law. Nevertheless, this trend don’t allow to explain in which cases the ignorance of law is excusable. By contrast, saving this difference with taking into account two forms of law enables to elucidate the problem of mistake in contract essence. Given that, the mistake in contract essence is equal to the mistake in the opportunity to realize the typical interest consisting the second – implicit – form of law. The correlation between individual intent and this typical interest is a condition to void a contract. The lack of such correlation means the ignorance in a normative content of a typical behavior, i.e. the ignorance of law.

Keywords: ignorance of law; mistake in law; essence of a contract; forms of law.

​

References

​

Байбак В.В., Карапетов А.Г. Анализ проблемных вопросов применения ст. 178
ГК РФ об оспаривании сделки в связи с существенным заблуждением [Baibak V.V.,
Karapetov A.G. Analysis of the Problematic Issues of Applying Article 178 of the
Civil Code of the Russian Federation on Contesting a Transaction in Connection
with a Material Misconception] (in Russian) // Bulletin of Economic Justice of the
Russian Federation. 2017. No. 9.
Берман Г. Западная традиция права: эпоха формирования [Berman G. Western
Tradition of Law: The Era of Formation] (in Russian). 2nd ed. Moscow: NORMA;
INFRA-М, 1998.
Боголепов Н.П. Учебник истории римского права. Пособие к лекциям [Bogolepov
N.P. Textbook of the History of Roman Law. The Manual for Lectures] (in Russian).
Moscow: University Printing House, 1907.
Брагова А.М. Содержание цицероновского понятия scientia [Bragova A.M. The
Content of the Cicero Concept of Scientia] (in Russian) // Magistra Vitae: Electronic
Journal of Historical Sciences and Archeology. 2018. No. 2.
Вестготская правда (Книга приговоров). Латинский текст. Перевод. Иссле-
дование [The Visigothic Code (Book of Sentences). Latin Text. Transfer. Study] (in
Russian). Moscow: Russian Foundation for the Promotion of Education and Science,
2012.
Виндшейд Б. Учебник пандектного права. Т. 1: Общая часть / пер. с нем. С.В. Пах-
мана [Windscheid B. Textbook of Law of Pandects. Vol. 1: General Part / Trans. by
S.V. Pakhman] (in Russian). St. Petersburg: Edition of Gieroglifov and Nikiforov, 1874.
Виноградов П.Г. Римское право в Средневековой Европе [Vinogradov P.G. Roman
Law in Medieval Europe] (in Russian). Moscow: Edition of A.A. Kartsev, 1910.
Дигесты Юстиниана / пер. с лат.; отв. ред. Л.Л. Кофанов. Т. IV [Digest of
Justinian / ed. by L.L. Kofanov. Vol. IV] (in Russian). Moscow: Statut, 2004.
Дигесты Юстиниана: избранные фрагменты в переводе и с примечания-
ми И.С. Перетерского / отв. ред. Е.А. Скрипилев [Digest of Justinian: Selected
Fragments in Translation and with Notes by I.S. Peretersky / Ed. by E.A. Skripilev]
(in Russian). Moscow: Nauka, 1984.
Дождев Д.В. Добросовестность (bona fides) как правовой принцип [Dozhdev D.V.
Good Faith (Bona Fides) as a L egal Principle] (in Russian) // Политико-правовые
ценности: история и современность / под. ред. В.С. Нерсесянца [Political and Legal
Values: History and Modernity / Ed. by V.S. Nersesyants]. Moscow: URSS Editorial,
2000.
Дождев Д.В. Изменение и расторжение договора вследствие существенного изме-
нения обстоятельств: европейская правовая традиция и современные тенденции
[Dozhdev D.V. Change and Termination of the Contract Due to a Significant Change
in Circumstances: European Legal Tradition and Modern Trends] (in Russian) //
Proceedings of the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
2018. No. 2.
Дождев Д.В. Наука сравнительного права и кауза сделки в Гражданском кодексе
РФ [Dozhdev D.V. The Science of Comparative Law and the Consideration in the
Civil Code of the Russian Federation] (in Russian) // Служение праву: сборник
статей / под ред. Д.А. Туманова, М.В. Захаровой [Serving the Law: Collection of
Articles / Ed. by D.A. Tumanov, M.V. Zakharova]. Moscow: Prospekt, 2017.
Дождев Д.В. Римское частное право: учебник / под общ. ред. В.С. Нерсесянца
[Dozhdev D.V. Private Roman Law: Textbook / Ed. by V.S. Nersesyants] (in Russian).
3rd ed. Moscow: NORMA; INFRA-М, 2013.
Дождев Д.В. Римское частное право: учебник [Dozhdev D.V. Private Roman Law:
Textbook] (in Russian). Moscow: NORMA, 2008.
Зезекало А.Ю. Заблуждение при совершении сделки [Zezekalo A.Yu.
Misconception in the Transaction] (in Russian). Tomsk: Publishing House of Tomsk
University, 2011.
Зезекало А.Ю. Новое в правилах о недействительности сделок, совершенных
под влиянием заблуждения [Zezekalo A.Yu. New in the Rules on the Invalidity of
Transactions Made Under the Influence of Error] (in Russian) // Law. 2015. No. 9.
Кашанин А.В. Кауза сделки в гражданском праве: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук
[Kashanin A.V. Consideration in Civil Law: Thesis for a Candidate Degree in Law
Sciences] (in Russian). Moscow, 2002.
Кельзен Г. Чистое учение о праве / пер. с нем. М.В. Антонова, С.В. Лезова [Kelsen H.
Pure Doctrine of Law / Trans. by M.V. Antonov, S.V. Lezov] (in Russian). 2nd ed.
St. Petersburg: Alef-Press, 2015.
Коптев А.В. Кодификация Феодосия [Koptev A.V. Codification of Theodosius]
(in Russian) // Ancient Law. 1996. No. 1.
Кофанов Л.Л. Римское право в Испании до введения Lex Wisigothorum [Kofanov
L.L. Roman Law in Spain Before the Introduction of Lex Wisigothorum] (in
Russian) // ΣΧΟΛΗ. 2010. Vol. 4. Iss. 1.
Муромцев А.С. Рецепция римского права на Западе [Muromtsev A.S. Reception
of Roman Law in the West] (in Russian). Moscow: Printing House of A.I. Mamontov &
Co., 1886.
Нерсесянц В.С. Философия права: учебник [Nersesyants V.S. Philosophy of Law:
Textbook] (in Russian). Moscow: NORMA, 2005.
Новицкая А.А. Становление учения о контракте в римской юриспруденции:
дис. ... канд. юрид. наук [Novitskaya A.A. Formation of the Doctrine of the Contract in
Roman Jurisprudence: Thesis for a Candidate Degree in Law Sciences] (in Russian).
Moscow, 2002.
Онида П. Правовое основание societas: от римского права к европейскому
[Onida P. Legal Basis of Societas: From Roman Law to European] (in Russian) // IUS
ANTIQVVM. Ancient Law. 2006. No. 17.
Перельман Х. Три аспекта справедливости / Пер. с франц. Е.Г. Самохиной
[Perelman H. Three Aspects of Justice / Trans. by E.G. Samokhina] (in Russian) //
University News. Jurisprudence. 2013. No. 2.
Покровский И.А. История римского права [Pokrovsky I.A. History of Roman
Law] (in Russian). St. Petersburg: Letnii sad, 1998.
Полдников Д.Ю. Научная доктрина ius commune как формальный источник
права в Западной Европе в XII–XVIII веках [Poldnikov D.Yu. The Scientific Doctrine of
Ius Commune as a Formal Source of Law in Western Europe in the 12th–18th Centuries]
(in Russian) // Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2013. No. 1.
Полдников Д.Ю. Формирование учения о договоре в правовой науке Запад-
ной Европы (XII–XVI вв.): дис. … докт. юрид. наук [Poldnikov D.Yu. Formation of the
Doctrine of the Contract in the Legal Science of Western Europe (12th–16th Centuries):
Thesis for a Candidate Degree in Law Sciences] (in Russian). Moscow, 2016.
Придворов Н.А., Трофимов Н.В. Презумпции в римском и современном пра-
ве: историко-теоретический аспект [Pridvorov N.A., Trofimov N.V. Presumption in
Roman and Modern Law: Historical and Theoretical Aspect] (in Russian) // Legal
Technique. 2010. No. 4.
Принцип формального равенства и взаимное признание права: коллектив-
ная монография / под общ. ред. В.В. Лапаевой, А.В. Полякова, В.В. Денисенко
[The Principle of Formal Equality and Mutual Recognition of Law: Collective
Monograph / Ed. by V.V. Lapaeva, A.V. Polyakov, V.V. Denisenko] (in Russian).
Moscow: Prospekt, 2016.
Радбрух Г. Философия права / пер. с нем. Ю.М. Юмашева [Radbruch G. Philosophy
of Law / Trans. by Yu.M. Yumashev] (in Russian). Moscow: Mezhdunarodnye
otnosheniia, 2004.
Савиньи Ф.К. Система современного римского права: в 8 т. Т. 2 / пер. с нем.
Г. Жигулина; под ред. О. Кутателадзе, В. Зубаря [Savigny F.C. The System of Modern
Roman Law. In 8 vols. Vol. 2 / Trans. by G. Zhigulin; ed. by O. Kutateladze, V. Zubar]
(in Russian). Moscow: Statut; Odessa: Law Research Center named after Savigny,
2012.
Сакки О. Идея закона (D. 1.3.2) и принцип суверенитета (D. 1.3.32 и 1.4.1)
в первой книге Дигест. Парадигмы современного конституционализма? / пер.
с итал. И.В. Лушниковой [Sakki O. The Idea of the Law (D. 1.3.2) and the Principle of
Sovereignty (D. 1.3.32 and 1.4.1) in the First Digest Book. The Paradigms of Modern
Constitutionalism? / Trans. by I.V. Lushnikova] (in Russian) // Дигесты Юстини-
ана / отв. ред. Л.Л. Кофанов. Т. VIII : Статьи и указатели [Digest of Justinian / Ed.
by L.L. Kofanov. Vol. 8: Articles and Indices]. Moscow: Statut, 2006.
Сильвестрова Е.В. Lex generalis. Императорская конституция в системе
источников греко-римского права V–X вв. н.э. [Silvestrova E.V. Lex Generalis. The
Imperial Constitution in the System of Sources of Greco-Roman Law of the 5th–10th
Centuries] (in Russian). Moscow: Indrik, 2007.
Скловский К.И. Сделка и ее действие. Комментарий главы 9 ГК РФ. Принцип
добросовестности [Sklovsky K.I. The Deal and its Action. Commentary on Chapter 9
of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The Principle of Good Faith] (in Russian).
4th ed. Moscow: Statut, 2019.
Утченко С.Л. Трактат Цицерона «Об обязанностях» и образ идеального граж-
данина [Utchenko S.L. Cicero’s Treatise “On Duties” and the Image of the Ideal Citizen]
(in Russian) // Цицерон. О старости. О дружбе. Об обязанностях / Пер. с лат. и ком-
ментарии В.О. Горенштейна [Cicero. On Old Age. On Friendship. On Responsibilities /
Trans. and Comments by V.O. Gorenstein]. Moscow: Nauka, 1993.
Харт Г.Л.А. Понятие права / пер. с англ.; под общ. ред. Е.В. Афонасина, С.В. Мои-
сеева [Hart H.L.A. The Concept of Law / Ed. by E.V. Afonasin, S.V. Moiseev] (in Russian).
St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg University, 2007.
Хвостов В.М. История римского права. Пособие к лекциям [Khvostov V.M.
The History of Roman Law. The Manual to Lectures] (in Russian). 3rd ed. Moscow:
Printing House of the I.D. Sytin’s Partnership, 1907.
Цицерон. Диалоги: О государстве. О законах / пер. В.О. Горенштейна [Cicero.
Dialogues: On the State. On Laws / Trans. by V.O. Gorenstein] (in Russian). Moscow:
Nauka, 1994.
Alpa G., Zeno-Zencovich V. Italian Private Law. New York: Routledge-Cavendish,
2007.
Bezemek C. Die Geschäftsgrundlage im österreichischen Zivilrecht: Strukturfragen
und Synopse. Wien: Springer, 2010.
Bolgár V. The Present Function of the Maxim Ignorantia Iuris Neminem Excusat –
A Comparative Study // Iowa Law Review. 1966. Vol. 52. Iss. 4.
Brouwer R. Ulpian’s Appeal to Nature: Roman Law as Universal Law // Tijdschrift
voor Rechtsgeschiedenis/Revue d’Histoire du Droit/The Legal History Review.
2015. Vol. 83. Iss. 1-2.
Daube D. Mistake of Law in Usucapion [G. 2.50, J. 2.6.5] // Cambridge Law Journal.
1958. Vol. 16. Iss. 1.
De Grooth G. L’influence de l’erreur sur la validité du consentement, vu historiquement
// Boletim da Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de Coimbra. 1958.
No. 34.
Flume W. Allgemeiner Teil des Bürgerlichen Rechts. Bd. 2: Das Rechtsgeschäft.
4. Aufl. Berlin; Heidelberg; New York: Springer, 1992.
Giaro T. Knowledge of Law as Knowledge of Facts: The Roman Experience //
Roman Law and Legal Knowledge: Studies in Memory of Henryk Kupiszewski.
Warsawa: Stowarzyszenie Absolwentów Wydziału Prawa i A dministracji
Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2011.
Gordley J. Jurists: A Critical History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Gschnitzer F. Allgemeiner Teil des bürgerlichen Rechts. Wien: Springer, 1966.
Guarino A. Pagine di diritto romano. Vol. 7. Napoli: Jovene, 1995.
Harries J. Law and Empire in Late Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1999.
Hincmarus Remensis. De Ordine Palatii / Hrsg. von T. Gross, R. Schieffer. Hannover:
Hahn, 1980.
Historisch-kritischer Kommentar zum BGB. Bd. 1: Allgemeiner Teil (§§ 1–240).
Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
Honore T. The Making of the Theodosian Code // Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung
für Rechtsgeschichte: Romanistische Abteilung. 1986. Bd. 103.
Honsell H., Mayer-Maly T. Rechtswissenschaft: Eine Einführung in das Recht und
seine Grundlagen. 6. Aufl. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer, 2015.
Horak F. Rechtsirrtum in Philosophie und Romischem Recht // Tijdschrift voor
Rechtsgeschiedenis/Revue d’Histoire du Droit/The Legal History Review. 1988.
Vol. 56. Iss. 3-4.
Hug W. Gesetzesflut und Rechtssetzungslehre // Gesetzgebungstheorie, Juristische
Logik, Zivil- und Prozeßrecht: Gedächtnisschrift für Jürgen Rödig. Heidelberg:
Springer, 1978.
Jakulin V. Rechtsirrtum // Slovenian Law Review. 2005. Vol. 2. No. 1/2.
Kantorowicz H., Buckland W.W. Studies in the Glossators of the Roman Law.
Cambridge: University Press, 1938.
Kaser M. Das römische Privatrecht. 1. Abschnitt: Das altrömische, das vorklassische
und das klassische Recht. 2. Aufl. München: C.H. Beck, 1971.
Kaser M. Römische Rechtsgeschichte. 2. Aufl. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1967.
Kiefner H. Die gegenwärtige Bedeutung der Maxime «Nul n’est cense ignorer la
loi» // Deutsche Landesreferate zum VII. Internationalen Kongress für Rechtsvergleichung
in Uppsala 1966. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1967.
Kommentar zum Allgemeinen bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch. Teilbände §§ 1–43.
4. Aufl. Wien: Manz, 2015.
Kommentar zum Allgemeinen bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch. Teilbände §§ 859–916.
4. Aufl. Wien: Manz, 2015.
Kroger J.R. The Philosophical Foundations of Roman Law: Aristotle, the Stoics,
and Roman Theories of Natural Law // Wisconsin Law Review. 2004.
Kupiszewski H. Ignorantia iuris nocet // Prawo Kanoniczne: kwartalnik prawnohistoryczny.
1982. Vol. 25. No. 1-2.
Kurzkommentar zum ABGB: Allgemeines bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, Ehegesetz,
Konsumentenschutzgesetz, IPR-Gesetz, Rom I- und Rom II -VO / Hrsg. von H. Koziol,
P. Bydlinski, R. Bollenberger. Wien: Springer, 2007.
Kuttner S. Gratian and the Schools of Law, 1140–1234. 2nd ed. London: Routledge,
2018.
Lafferty D.W. The Edictum Theoderici: A Study of a Roman Legal Document from
Ostrogothic Italy. Toronto: University of Toronto, 2010.
Larenz K. Lehrbuch des Schuldrechts. Bd. 1: Allgemeiner Teil. München: C.H.
Beck, 1960.
Lenel O. Nochmals die Lehre von der Voraussetzung // Archiv für die civilistische
Praxis. 1892. Bd. 79. H. 1.
Leonhard R. Der Irrtum als Ursache nichtiger Verträge. Bd. 2: Irrtumsfälle in den
römischen Rechtsquellen. 2. Aufl. Breslau: M. & H. Marcus, 1907.
Lottin D.O. Le problème de l’ignorantia iuris de Gratien à Saint Thomas d’Aquin //
Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale. 1933. Vol. 5.
Lubbe G. Mistake // Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative Law / Ed. by J.M. Smits.
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2006.
Markesinis B.S., Unberath H., Johnston A. The German Law of Contract: A Comparative
Treatise. 2nd ed. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2006.
Matthews J.F. Laying Down the Law: A Study of the Theodosian Code. New Haven &
London: Yale University Press, 2000.
Mayer J. Der Rechtsirrtum und seine Folgen im bürgerlichen Recht. Bielefeld:
Gieseking, 1989.
Mayer-Maly T. Das Putativtitelproblem bei der Usucapio. Graz: Böhlau, 1962.
Mayer-Maly T. Rechtsirrtum und Rechtsunkenntnis als Probleme des
Privatrechts // Archiv für die civilistische Praxis. 1970. Bd. 170. H. 2/3.
Mistake, Fraud and Duties to Inform in European Contract Law / Ed. by R. Sefton-
Green. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Motive zu dem Entwurfe eines Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuches für das Deutsche
Reich. Bd. 1: Sachenrecht. Berlin; Leipzig: J. Guttentag (D. Collin), 1888.
Mühlenbruch F. Über juris und facti ignorantia und deren Einfluß auf Rechtsverhältnisse
// Archiv für die civilistische Praxis. 1819. Bd. 2. H. 35.
Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch. Bd. 1: Allgemeiner Teil
(§§ 1–240). 6 Aufl. München: C.H. Beck, 2011.
Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch. Bd. 2: Schuldrecht,
Allgemeiner Teil (§§ 241–432). 5. Aufl. München: C.H. Beck, 2007.
Murphy E.J. The Duty of the Government to Make the Law Known // Fordham
Law Review. 1982. Vol. 51. Iss. 2.
Musielak H-J. Der Irrtum über die Rechtsfolgen einer Willenserklärung //
Juristenzeitung. 2014. Bd. 69. H. 2.
Nivarra L., Ricciuto V., Scognamiglio C. Istituzioni di diritto privato. Torino: Giappichelli,
2015.
Palandt. Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch. 66. Aufl. München: C.H. Beck, 2007.
Pennington K. The “Big Bang”: Roman Law in the Early Twelfth-Century //
Rivista internazionale di diritto comune. 2007. No. 18.
Pothier R.J. A Treatise on the Law of Obligations or Contracts. Vol. 2. Philadelphia:
R.H. Small, 1839.
Rösler H. Changed and Unforeseen Circumstances in German and International
Contract Law // Slovenian Law Review. 2008. Vol. 47. No. 1/2.
Roumy F. L’ignorance du droit dans la doctrine civiliste des XIIe–XIIIe siècles //
Cahiers de recherches médiévales et humanistes. 2000. T. 7.
Ryu P.K., Silving H. Error Juris: A Comparative Study // University of Chicago
Law Review. 1957. Vol. 24. Iss. 3.
Schermaier M.J. Die Bestimmung des wesentlichen Irrtums von den Glossatoren
bis zum BGB. Wien: Böhlau, 2000.
Schulz F. Principles of Roman Law / Trans. by M. Wolff. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1936.
Schwab D., Löhning M. Einführung in das Zivilrecht: mit BGB-Allgemeiner
Teil, Schuldrecht Allgemeiner Teil, Kauf- und Deliktsrecht. München: C.F. Müller,
2012.
Schwind F. Römisches Recht. 1. Teil: Geschichte, Rechtsgang, System des Privatrechtes.
Wien: Springer, 1950.
Schwind F. Zur Frage der Publikation im Römischen Recht: Mit Ausblicken in das
altgriechische und ptolemäische Rechtsgebiet. 2. Aufl. München: C.H. Beck, 1973.
Scott S.P. The Civil Law. Vol. V. Cincinnati: Central Trust Co., 1932.
Simshäuser W. Windscheids Voraussetzungslehre // Archiv für die civilistische
Praxis. 1972. Bd. 172. H. 1.
Smits J., Calomme C. The Reform of the French Law of Obligations: Les Jeux Sont
Faits // Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 2016. Vol. 23. Iss. 6.
Stadden C.M. Error of Law // Columbia Law Review. 1907. Vol. 7. Iss. 7.
Stein P. Regulae Iuris: From Juristic Rules to Legal Maxims. Edinburgh: University
Press, 1966.
Stein P. Roman Law in European History. Cambridge; New York; Melbourne:
Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Stelmach J., Brozeck B. Methods of Legal Reasoning. Dordrecht: Springer, 2006.
The Rule of Law: History, Theory and Criticism / Ed. by P. Costa, D. Zolo.
Dordrecht: Springer, 2007.
Toste M. Invincible Ignorance and the Americas: Why and How the Salamancan
Theologians Made Use of a Medieval Notion // Rechtsgeschichte/Legal History.
2018. No. 26.
Van Warmelo P. Ignorantia Iuris // Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis/Revue
d’Histoire du Droit/The Legal History Review. 1954. Vol. 22. Iss. 1.
Vander Waerdt P.A. Philosophical Influence on Roman Jurisprudence? The Case
of Stoicism and Natural Law // Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt.
Bd. II.36.7. Berlin; New York: De Gruyter, 1994.
Waerdt P.A. Philosophical Influence on Roman Jurisprudence? The Case of Stoicism
and Natural Law // Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt. 1994. Vol. 2.
Iss. 7.
Westermann H.P. Die causa im französischen und deutschen Zivilrecht. Berlin:
De Gruyter, 1967.
Wieacker F. A History of Private Law in Europe / Trans. by T. Weir; with a foreword
by R. Zimmermann. New York: Clarendon Press, 1996.
Windscheid B. Die Lehre des römischen Rechts von der Voraussetzung, Düsseldorf:
Buddeus, 1850.
Winkel L.С. Error Iuris Nocet: Rechtsirrtum als Problem der Rechtsordnung.
Zutphen: Terra Publishing Co., 1985.
Winkel L.С. L’erreur de droit dans les procédures classiques et postclassiques
romaines et l’histoire des articles 1356 et 2052 du Code civil // Tijdschrift voor
Rechtsgeschiedenis/Revue d’Histoire du Droit/The Legal History Review. 1985.
Vol. 53. Iss. 3.
Winkel L. Rechtsirrtum im Völkerrecht bei Hugo Grotius // Gedächtnisschrift für
Theo Mayer-Maly zum 80. Geburtstag // Hrsg. von F. Harrer, H. Honsell, P. Mader.
Wien; NewYork: Springer, 2011.
Winkel L.С. Vorbemerkungen zum Thema Rechtsirrtum in der mittelalterlichen
Jurisprudenz, zugleich ein Thema aus der Geschichte der Rechtsideologie // Ius
commune. 1985. Bd. 13.
Winroth A. The Making of Gratian’s Decretum. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2000.
Zimmermann R. The Law of Obligations: Roman Foundations of the Civilian
Tradition. Cape Town: Juta, 1992.

Information about the author

​

Pestov M.M. (Moscow, Russia) – Second-Year Graduate Student, Russian School of Private Law (8, Bldg. 2 Ilyinka St., Moscow, 103132, Russia; e-mail: pestov-2013@yandex.ru).

​