Peculiarities about Conclusion and Execution of Agreements on the Purchase-Sale of Rights

Summary. Peculiarities about conclusion and execution of agreements on the purchase/sale of rights Being one of the ways to transfer rights, purchase/sale of rights plays an important role in civil legal circulation; therefore, a proper understanding of rules regulating these relations is necessary. As property rights are specific object of civil rights, such particularity determines characteristics of the purchase/sale thereof. Thus, to understand these characteristics, analysis of the rights in question and transfer hereof has to be made. Though the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania mentions an agreement on the purchase/sale of rights, it does not provide its respective definition. Therefore, referring to general conception of agreement on purchase/sale of rights, a concept of agreement on purchase/sale of rights is presented in the paper; and taking into consideration criteria for classification of agreements, common characteristics of agreement on purchase/sale of rights are distinguished too. Moreover, in order to understand peculiarities about the sale of rights, the author seeks to disclose particularity of property rights and their legal nature as well as to find out which rights could be sold and the sale of which rights is restricted by law. In addition, formation and development of the institute of right transfer and its modification affected by speedily developing economical relations is reviewed. And finally, considering the fact that Civil Code specifies both agreement on purchase/sale of rights and institute of cession transfer the provisions of which are applied to the transfer of property rights (Article 6.110 of Civil Code), possible interrelation between these rules of law is established. The paper analyses some problematic aspects of transfer of rights which mainly concern protection of debtor and grantee’s interests. Also, specialists’ of jurisprudence opinion about the said issues is expressed, current judicial practice is analyzed and author’s position is presented