Concurrent claims in contract and tort in Serbian law: With reference to the new Hungarian Civil Code from 2013 and the Project of the Reform of the French Civil Code regarding liability for damage from 2017

In the Serbian literature issue of overlap between contractual and liability in tort has been thoroughly discussed. The majority references state that differences two regimes outweigh their common features, thus separate sets rules should exist governing each. There are authors who claim not such significance so as make integral concept for damage senseless, hence they support idea regulating both by a single set rules. effective Obligations Act 1978 is line with opinion, since it envisages different each regime liability. Taking into account existing duality Act, which significantly differ on major points, key tortious liability, namely system apply if injured party may base (so-called concurrency claims). Lacking an explicit rule asserts more favorable to apply, corresponds German solution. inspiration this paper found new Hungarian Civil Code from 2013 which, contrast its predecessor, 1959 Code, contains claims contract tort. It prescribes mandatory application even when inflicted supports Such approach French non-cumul doctrine. aim is, one hand, initiate discussion whether would be reasonable have statutory law explicitly On other highlights reasons led legislator Hungary prohibit claims. solution Turkish 2011 mentioned paper, well, also subject matter. However, took diametrically opposite standpoint Code: enables competing only tort, but according any granting redress party. Finally, gives review Project Reform concerning 2017. envisaged codify traditional case doctrine exclusion concurrence mandates specifies, however, some exceptions, regardless existence parties, apply. For time being, seems genuine will legislature lacking embody amendments civil.