أثر الغبن الفاحش للشريك في الحصة الشائعة : (دراسة مقارنة)‎

Abstract EN

The important effect of the common division is that each partner is confined to a subdivided part of the common ownership equal to his validity in this thing after his right during the common period was a common share in the whole thing, and the aim of the division is the competence of each of the sharing partners, with a divided part equivalent to his share in Ownership, but the reality of the situation is that there are many possibilities for an obscene unfairness to be inflicted on one of the partners, and he has to request its revocation.

If this is proven, the division shall be revoked and run again until the gross unfairness rises and the division becomes fair, and the division included in the cassation request is a consensual division, while the judicial division is not permitted.

A case of unfairness, because it is assumed in this division that all precautions have been taken to prevent unfairness.

Because the judicial division is not permissible with the division.

The reason is because the judiciary has taken all measures to prevent unfairness from occurring.

However, some legislations, including the French and Lebanese legislations, allow revocation of the division even if it is judicial The research suggests that revocation of the division be due to gross injustice in common ownership, not only in consensual division or agreement, but also in judicial division, because judicial officials are people who are not infallible, in line with what was stated by French law and the Lebanese Obligations Law followed its approach.

This is in addition to the fact that the division of common money due to the outrageous unfairness of consensual division may not raise suspicion and interpretations, and harmony between the two may not be achieved later due to the lack of awareness of some and lack of experience or knowledge of the value of each share of common money.