Page 376 - Latent Defect or Excessive Price?Exploring Early Modern Legal Approach to Remedying Defects in Goods Exchanged for Money - Bruijn

CODES OF CIVIL LAW
Gewährleistung, he can the general claim for damages in §§ 1323 and 1324, which claim is subject to its own three-year limitation of § 1489.198
7.4.3 Limitation periods
That brings us to the ABGB's system of limitation regarding the duty to safeguard from eviction, latent defects and encumbrances. In short, it is almost similar to that of the ALR. Also in the ABGB, the decisive factor is whether the traded item is movable or immovable. Following the ALR, § 933 ABGB has a three-year period of limitation for immovables and a shorter six-month period for movables.199 The ABGB's drafters opted for short periods, because with the increase of time it grows more and more difficult to prove the presence of a defect at the time of the contract's conclusion.200 The periods start to run with the delivery of the thing, as in Zeiller's words 'one will quickly perceive the defect'. Unlike the Code civil, the ABGB makes a clear choice about when the periods start.201
Paragraph 933 ABGB has the same limitation periods for remedies for eviction as for the remedies for latent defects and encumbrances. The ABGB also imposes the remedy upon a promisor who warranted the absence of defects or conceals them to the short limitation periods of § 933. Similar to the ALR, the ABGB no longer makes the limitation periods depending on whether the recipient sues for rescission or reduction of price. Yet, the period within which the recipient can bring a remedy for encumbrances or eviction does not start before the recipient becomes acquainted with the thing's being encumbered or subject to a third-party claim. Zeiller argues that only from that moment on can the recipient effectively institute a claim.202
In the event the recipient wants to sue for loss which had resulted from the thing's defect, encumbrances, non-performance203 or eviction, he has, according to § 1489, three years to do so. The period of this remedy's limitation also only begins after the damages have become known to the recipient.204 This is a noteworthy difference with the limitation of
3.1, to § 932 ABGB, no. 2, p. 139.
198 § 1489 ABGB: Jede Entschädigungsklage erlischt nach drey Jahren von der Zeit an, zu welcher der
Schade dem Beschädigten bekannt wurde. Ist ihm der Schade nicht bekannt worden, oder ist derselbe
aus einem Verbrechen entstanden; so verjährt sich das Klagerecht nur nach dreyßig Jahren.
199 §933 ABGB: Wer die Gewährleistung fordern will, muß sein Recht, wenn es unbewegliche Sachen betrifft, binnen drey Jahren; betrifft es aber bewegliche, binnen sechs Monathen geltend machen, sonst
ist das Recht erloschen; the ALR has three years for immovables and one for movables. See 7.2.3.
200 Zeiller, Commentar, vol. 3.1, p. 140; which is something different than 'Sicherheit des Verkehrs' as Gschnitzer believes was the reason for the short limitation periods. Klang, Kommentar, 4.1, to § 933
ABGB, p. 550.
201 Zeiller, Commentar, vol. 3.1, p. 139: '... von der Zeit der Übergabe weil man die Mängel bald gewahr
nimmt...'; for the Code civil see 7.3.3.
202 Zeiller, Commentar, vol. 3.1, p. 140: '... weil vond dem Rechte auf Gewährleistung vor diesem Zeitpuncte
kein Gebrauch gemacht werden konnte (§ 1487)'.
203 § 919 ABGB: Wenn ein Theil den Vertrag entweder gar nicht;... erfüllet; so ist der andere Theil... nicht
berechtigt, die Aufhebung, sondern nur die genaue Erfüllung des Vetrages und Ersatz zu fordern; from §§ 1295 and 1489 ABGB it follows that the limitation period for this remedy is three years; Zeiller, Commentar, vol. 3.1, p. 116.
204 § 1489 ABGB: ... von der Zeit an, zu welcher der Schade dem Beschädigten bekannt wurde...; the 1916 reformulated § 1489 made it clear that this period covers both contractual and extra-contractual loss, although Zeiller had already explained that that was the case. § 1489 ABGB 1916: ... der Schade mag
372