{"id":51230,"date":"2025-11-15T11:27:53","date_gmt":"2025-11-15T08:27:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/?p=51230"},"modified":"2025-11-15T11:27:55","modified_gmt":"2025-11-15T08:27:55","slug":"lat-sutarties-sudaryma-gali-lemti-ne-tik-jos-pasirasymo-faktas","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/2025\/11\/15\/lat-sutarties-sudaryma-gali-lemti-ne-tik-jos-pasirasymo-faktas\/","title":{"rendered":"LAT: sutarties sudarym\u0105 gali lemti ne tik jos pasira\u0161ymo faktas"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Lietuvos Auk\u0161\u010diausiasis Teismas (LAT) nusprend\u0117,<\/a> kad, sutarties \u0161alims nepasira\u0161ius k\u016brinio u\u017esakymo sutarties, apie jos (ne)sudarym\u0105 teismai turi spr\u0119sti vertindami \u0161ali\u0173 valios i\u0161rai\u0161k\u0105, kitas reik\u0161mingas aplinkybes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Byloje sprend\u017eiant i\u0161imtini\u0173 turtini\u0173 teisi\u0173 \u012f Platform\u0105 (kompiuterines programas ir j\u0173 pirmin\u012f kod\u0105) perdavimo ie\u0161kovei klausim\u0105, gin\u010das kilo d\u0117l to, ar \u0161alys yra sudariusios Lietuvos Respublikos autori\u0173 teisi\u0173 ir gretutini\u0173 teisi\u0173 \u012fstatymo (ATGT\u012e) 42 straipsnio 1 dalies nuostatas atitinkan\u010di\u0105 ra\u0161ytin\u0119 sutart\u012f. Ie\u0161kov\u0117, vienu i\u0161 ie\u0161kinio reikalavim\u0173 pra\u0161ydama teismo pripa\u017einti, kad jai priklauso i\u0161imtin\u0117s turtin\u0117s autoriaus teis\u0117s \u012f Platform\u0105, \u012frodin\u0117jo, kad ra\u0161ytin\u0117 k\u016brinio u\u017esakymo sutartis \u0161ali\u0173 nepasira\u0161yta, ta\u010diau tokia sutartis buvo sudaryta ir \u012fvykdyta. Atsakov\u0117, gindamasi nuo pareik\u0161to ie\u0161kinio, teig\u0117, kad n\u0117ra sudaryta \u012fstatyme reikalaujamos ra\u0161ytin\u0117s formos k\u016brinio u\u017esakymo sutartis, atitinkamai n\u0117ra \u0161ali\u0173 susitarimo d\u0117l i\u0161imtini\u0173 autoriaus teisi\u0173 \u012f Platform\u0105 perleidimo ie\u0161kovei. Byl\u0105 nagrin\u0117j\u0119 teismai pri\u0117jo prie i\u0161vados, kad \u0161alys nesilaik\u0117 ATGT\u012e nustatytos sandoriui privalomos ra\u0161ytin\u0117s formos, nes sutartis \u0161ali\u0173 nebuvo pasira\u0161yta, taigi, nebuvo sudaryta.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kasacinis teismas pa\u017eym\u0117jo, kad sutart\u012f pasira\u0161iusi\u0173 asmen\u0173 para\u0161ai laikytini i\u0161orine sutartini\u0173 santyki\u0173 \u012fforminimo, t. y. valios sudaryti sandor\u012f, i\u0161rai\u0161kos forma. D\u0117l koki\u0173 nors prie\u017eas\u010di\u0173 sutarties nepatvirtinus abiej\u0173 \u0161ali\u0173 para\u0161ais, \u0161ali\u0173 valia sudaryti sutart\u012f \u012frodin\u0117tina faktais ir duomenimis, i\u0161 kuri\u0173 galima spr\u0119sti apie susitarimo buvim\u0105. Nagrin\u0117jamoje byloje teismai ra\u0161ytin\u0117s sutarties sudarym\u0105 sutapatino su para\u0161u, kaip b\u016btinu rekvizitu tokios sutarties sudarymui patvirtinti, ir nevertino aplinkybi\u0173, jog sutarties s\u0105lygos buvo derinamos naudojantis telekomunikacij\u0173 galiniais \u012frenginiais. \u0160ali\u0173 elgesys bendradarbiaujant d\u0117l projekto vykdymo ir pl\u0117tojimo, telekomunikacij\u0173 galiniais \u012frenginiais derinant sutarties s\u0105lygas ir joms pritariant, sprend\u017eiant d\u0117l tokios sutarties pasira\u0161ymo, gali b\u016bti pagrindas spr\u0119sti apie ai\u0161k\u0173 ir bes\u0105lygi\u0161k\u0105 sutarties \u0161alies sutikim\u0105 su kitos \u0161alies pateiktos sutarties s\u0105lygomis. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

D\u0117l to kasacinis teismas nusprend\u0117, kad teism\u0173 i\u0161vada apie k\u016brinio u\u017esakymo sutarties nesudarym\u0105 padaryta netinkamai ai\u0161kinant sutar\u010di\u0173 sudarym\u0105 ir sutarties form\u0105 reglamentuojan\u010dias materialiosios teis\u0117s normas ir teism\u0173 praktik\u0105, be kita ko, suabsoliutinant \u0161ali\u0173 para\u0161\u0173 reik\u0161m\u0119 sutarties sudarymo faktui konstatuoti ir nepagr\u012fstai ignoruojant kitas nustatytas aplinkybes, kaip, pvz., sutarties vykdym\u0105.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lietuvos Auk\u0161\u010diausiasis Teismas, konstatav\u0119s, kad byl\u0105 nagrin\u0117j\u0119 teismai netinkamai ai\u0161kino ir taik\u0117 materialiosios teis\u0117s normas, nesivadovavo teism\u0173 praktika, tod\u0117l i\u0161vad\u0105 d\u0117l sutarties tarp \u0161ali\u0173 nesudarymo padar\u0117 nei\u0161tyr\u0119 ir ne\u012fvertin\u0119 vis\u0173 byloje nustatyt\u0173 aplinkybi\u0173, 2025 m. lapkri\u010dio 13 d. nutartimi civilin\u0117je byloje panaikino apeliacin\u0117s instancijos teismo nutart\u012f ir pirmosios instancijos teismo sprendim\u0105 ir perdav\u0117 byl\u0105 pirmosios instancijos teismui nagrin\u0117ti i\u0161 naujo.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lietuvos Auk\u0161\u010diausiojo Teismo informacija<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Lietuvos Auk\u0161\u010diausiasis Teismas (LAT) nusprend\u0117, kad, sutarties \u0161alims nepasira\u0161ius k\u016brinio u\u017esakymo sutarties, apie jos (ne)sudarym\u0105 teismai turi spr\u0119sti vertindami \u0161ali\u0173 valios i\u0161rai\u0161k\u0105, kitas reik\u0161mingas aplinkybes. Byloje sprend\u017eiant i\u0161imtini\u0173 turtini\u0173 teisi\u0173 \u012f Platform\u0105 (kompiuterines programas ir j\u0173 pirmin\u012f kod\u0105) perdavimo ie\u0161kovei klausim\u0105, gin\u010das kilo d\u0117l to, ar \u0161alys yra sudariusios Lietuvos Respublikos autori\u0173 teisi\u0173 ir gretutini\u0173 …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":51231,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"episode_type":"","audio_file":"","duration":"","filesize":"","date_recorded":"","explicit":"","block":"","filesize_raw":""},"categories":[32],"tags":[2477,97,812,2287],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51230"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=51230"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51230\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":51232,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51230\/revisions\/51232"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/51231"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=51230"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=51230"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.teise.pro\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=51230"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}