Kacířský výklad zástavního práva

In the article the author formulates alternative interpretation solutions to art. 151d, par. 2 of the Civil Code. By means of these she/he attempts to overcome obstacles to realizing the settlement function of lien in the mode of Civil Code in cases when the distrainee is different from the obliged debtor because of consequent transfer of the pledged object. The subject-matter of the article may be characterized as searching for the content of responsibility as an unfavourable consequence of failure in fulfillment the duties of the obliged debtor which will be projected into the sphere of pledged object acquirer's property. In the article two situation are distinguished. In the first model situation the acquirer is considered to bear re­sponsibility for fulfillment of the accessory obligation "only". Within this situation problems of whether the first transfer of pledge leads either to transformation of lien to legal liability, or to changes in the content pledger's responsibility, are con­sidered. In the second model situation the acquirer of pledge takes over the main obligation ex lege in the moment real legal effects of the transfer become effective. This situation strengthens legal position of creditor by cumulative intercession.