varstvo upnikov kapitalskih družb s pravili o vezanem kapitalu
Jerneja Prostor (Author), Klemen Podobnik (Mentor), Gregor Dugar (Thesis defence commission member), Saša Prelič (Thesis defence commission member)

Abstract

V doktorski disertaciji je osrednje mesto obravnave namenjeno varstvu interesov upnikov z naslovnim institutom korporacijske kondikcije. Problematika je neločljivo povezana z izplačilno prepovedjo, zato je ta sprva analizirana (zaradi pomembnih razlik) ločeno za d.d. in za d.o.o. Zatem so obravnavani pravni položaji, ki pomenijo kršitev izplačilne prepovedi, a so zaradi svojih specifičnosti urejeni kot posebni instituti (npr. nedopustno pridobivanje lastnih delnic, prepoved finančne asistence). Zaradi aktualnosti, ki jo tematiki dajejo številni primeri v sodni in poslovni praksi, je na več mestih v disertaciji posebna pozornost namenjena obravnavi zagotovljenih posojil družbe družbeniku in zavarovanj za družbenikovo posojilo. Še posebej v zvezi s tem je pomembno ločiti, kdo so naslovniki izplačilne prepovedi in na drugi strani, od koga lahko družba uveljavlja vrnitev prepovedanih plačil. Eno ključnih poglavij obravnava pravne posledice kršitve izplačilne prepovedi. Zaključki tega poglavja so namreč ovrgli tezo, da je pravni posel kot podlaga prepovedanemu izplačilu ničen. Kar pa ne pomeni, da je pravni posel veljaven in da mora prejemnik koristi družbi le izravnati prikrajšanje. Na ta način se lahko prepovedano plačilo vrne samo, če družba s tem soglaša. Sama ima sicer vedno možnost terjati nazaj, kar je dala v naravi, kar pomeni, da so pravne posledice vendarle skoraj enake, kot če bi bil pravni posel ničen. V nadaljevanju je pojasnjena močnejša pravna narava korporacijske kondikcije v razmerju do obligacijskih zahtevkov, prav tako je obrazloženo, zakaj gre po vsebini za vrnitveni in ne obogatitveni zahtevek. V posebnem poglavju je prikazana izplačilna prepoved v evropskem pravu družb. Precej pozornosti pa je v disertaciji namenjene obravnavi pravnih položajev v pogodbenem, dejanskem in kvalificiranem dejanskem koncernu, kjer se obravnava ponovno loči glede na to, ali odvisna družba nastopa v pravnoorganizacijski obliki d.d. ali d.o.o. Analiza koncernskega prava je usmerjana na različne pravne mehanizme, ki jih ureditev zagotavlja upnikom odvisne družbe v primerjavi z neodvisno družbo, v kateri izplačilna prepoved velja v neomejenem obsegu. S pojmom kvalificiranega dejanskega koncerna sta neločljivo povezana instituta spregleda pravne osebnosti oz. v Nemčiji odškodninske odgovornosti za namerno oškodovanje družbe z ravnanjem, ki nasprotuje dobrim poslovnim običajem. Podrobno so obravnavani tudi ti položaji, predvsem z vidika notranje oz. zunanje odgovornosti družbenikov za prikrajšanje, ki so ga družbi in posredno njenim upnikom povzročili s svojimi nedopustnimi ravnanji v družbi. Zadnji tezi potrjujeta poglavji o uveljavljanju korporacijske kondikcije in o njenem uveljavljanju po tem, ko je bila družba že izbrisana iz sodnega registra zaradi zaključenega postopka, ki se je izvedel s ciljem njenega prenehanja v ožjem pomenu. S sklicevanjem na načelo enakosti pred zakonom je pojasnjeno, da bi morali imeti upniki d.o.o. enako upravičenje za uveljavljanje korporacijske kondikcije, kot jim je zagotovljeno v d.d. Prav tako izbris družbe iz sodnega registra ni razlog, ki bi upnikom preprečeval uveljavljanje tega zahtevka tudi še po tem, ko je bila družba izbrisana po stečajnem postopku (ki se je končal brez razdelitve upnikom) ali po izbrisu brez likvidacije.

Keywords

gospodarske družbe;kapitalske družbe;varstvo upnikov;prikrita izplačila;kondikcija;korporacijska kondikcija;pogodbeni koncerni;dejanski koncerni;spregled pravne osebnosti;zahtevki;upniki;izbris iz sodnega registra;Slovenija;Nemčija;gospodarsko pravo;pravo gospodarskih družb;družbeno pravo;doktorske disertacije;

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Typology: 2.08 - Doctoral Dissertation
Organization: UL PF - Faculty of Law
Publisher: [J. Prostor]
UDC: 347.72(497.4+430)(043.3)
COBISS: 16399185 Link will open in a new window
Views: 1556
Downloads: 677
Average score: 0 (0 votes)
Metadata: JSON JSON-RDF JSON-LD TURTLE N-TRIPLES XML RDFA MICRODATA DC-XML DC-RDF RDF

Other data

Secondary language: English
Secondary title: Corporate Restitution - The Protection of Creditors of Limited Liability Companies with Tied-up Capital Provisions
Secondary abstract: The central place of the doctoral thesis focuses on the protection of creditors' interests through the headline institution of corporate restitution. The addressed issue is inextricably linked to the rule on prohibited distribution, which is why the latter is initially analysed (because of significant differences) separately for PLC (German AG) and Ltd. (German GmbH). This is followed by the examination of legal situations that constitute a violation of the rule on prohibited distribution but are regulated as special institutes due to their specificity (for example, prohibition of the acquisition of own shares, the prohibition on financial assistance). Because of the current relevance of this topic, which has been promoted by numerous cases in the business practice, several parts of this dissertation pay a special attention to the loans to shareholders and the insurance provided by the company for their debts. In this regard, it is particularly important to distinguish between the persons that are subject to the rule on prohibited distribution and, on the other hand, the persons from whom the company can claim the restitution of prohibited distribution. One of the key chapters discusses legal consequences of the violation of the rule on prohibited distribution. In fact, the conclusions of this chapter have rejected the thesis that a legal transaction, which represents the grounds for the prohibited distribution, is null and void. However, this also does not mean that the legal transaction is valid and that the person benefiting from it should merely compensate the company for the deprivation. The prohibited distribution may only be returned in this manner if the company agrees. The company always has an option to reclaim anything given in kind, which means that the legal consequences are almost the same as if the legal transaction was null and void. Next, the dissertation explains the stronger legal nature of corporate restitution in relation to the claims under the law of obligations, as well as the reasons why, in terms of its contents, this claim is a restitution and not enrichment. A special chapter presents the rule on prohibited distribution in the context of the European company law. A considerable amount of attention is also paid to the study of legal positions in enterprise agreements, de facto concern and qualified de facto concern, the study of which is again divided, depending on whether the subsidiary is legally organised as PLC or Ltd. The analysis of the law of concerns is focused on various legal mechanisms that are made available to the creditors of the subsidiary by the law, compared to the independent company in which the rule on prohibited distribution applies to an unlimited extent. The notion of a qualified de facto concern is inextricably linked to the institution of the disregard of legal personality, or, in Germany, the liability for deliberately causing damage to the company by the conduct that is contrary to honest practices in commercial matters. The dissertation addresses these positions in detail, especially from the perspective of the internal and external liability of shareholders for the loss suffered by the company, and indirectly by its creditors, as a result of their inadmissible conduct in the company. The last two theses are confirmed in chapters dealing with the assertion of corporate restitution and its application after the company was already cancelled from the court register as a result of completed proceedings, which were carried out with the aim of its dissolution sensu stricto. By referring to the principle of equality before the law, it is made clear that the creditors of Ltd. should have the same level of entitlement to claim corporate restitution as in the PLC. Likewise, the cancellation of a company from the court register is not a reason that would prevent the creditors from asserting this claim, even after the company was cancelled following bankruptcy proceedings (which concluded without the distribution to the creditors) or after the cancellation from the register without liquidation.
Secondary keywords: creditors' protection;disguised distributions;corporate restitution;enterprise agreements;de facto concerns;disregard of legal personality;creditors;claims;cancellation from the register;
Type (COBISS): Doctoral dissertation
Study programme: 0
Embargo end date (OpenAIRE): 1970-01-01
Thesis comment: Univ. v Ljubljani, Pravna fak.
Pages: VII, 267 str.
ID: 10975267