On the boundary between defined and non-defined contracts

The article analyzes the categorical differences between defined and non-defined contracts in civil law. At present, there is enough research on the role of a defined contract to recognize it as such. At the same time, it is worth noting that there is no sufficient regulatory framework and dogmatic interpretation. Up to the present day, there are splits over the merits of the boundary between defined and non-defined contracts. On a formal level, "defined" contracts should be recognized as contracts specified in the" law and other legal acts»; consistently, "non-defined" contracts are not specified in them. However, this approach generates an excessively broad understanding of them: in addition to the Civil Code, it is important to consider a variety of sources that are not presented in a single list. Here there is a ground for a separate discussion, as in the bulk of the participants of property relations it is not clear what contracts are referred to as "nondefined". In addition, the current wording of paragraph 2 of article 421 of the Civil Code proceeds from the fact that the word "provided", supposedly does not raise any questions. In practice, "foresight" can be interpreted as a mere mention in these acts of a contract, and as the presence of detailed legal regulation in a significant number of systematic rules.