Pristop k dolgu pravne osebe pri prevzemu premoženjske celote

Hribovšek, Katarina (avtor), Simoneti, Marko (mentor)

Določba 433. člena Obligacijskega zakonika (OZ) kogentno uzakonja, da tisti, na katerega preide po pogodbi kakšna premoženjska celota ali posamezen njen del, odgovarja poleg dotedanjega imetnika in solidarno z njim za dolgove, ki se nanašajo na to celoto oziroma njen del, vendar le do vrednosti njenih aktiv. Določba pomeni varstvo upnikov pri odsvajanju dolžnikovega premoženja na eni strani, na drugi pa ogroža pravno varnost pridobitelja, ki postane solidarno odgovoren za dolgove pridobljenega premoženja. Glede na ureditev poslovanja gospodarskih družb v Zakonu o gospodarskih družbah (ZGD-1), kot specialnejšim zakonom, določba v okviru statusnih materialnih prestrukturiranj ni uporabljiva. Prevzemnik premoženja, kot univerzalen naslednik, vstopi v vsa pravna razmerja prenosnika. Nasprotno pri nakupu poslovnih sredstev (asset deal) prevzemnik premoženja, kot singularni naslednik, prevzame le aktivo. V poslovnem svetu je prednost slednjih, da lahko prevzemnik v sklopu svoje dejavnosti začne koristiti na novo pridobljeno lastninsko pravico brez obveznosti. Nasprotno pa slovenska zakonodaja na podlagi obravnavane določbe uzakonja solidarno odgovornost. Določba prinaša eventualnost uporabe v okviru insolventnih postopkov, v katere prinaša kontroverznost in nejasnosti, zaradi varstva upnikov in načel po Zakonu o finančnem poslovanju, postopkih zaradi insolventnosti in prisilnem prenehanju (ZFPPIPP). Na področju delovnopravne zakonodaje je uporaba določbe izključena zaradi specialnejše ureditve varstva delavcev v 75. členu Zakona o delovnih razmerjih (ZDR-1). Primerjalno pravno je nemški civilni zakonik vseboval podobno določbo 419 BGB, ki je bila izbrisana, analogno je tudi pri nas potrebno razmisliti o izbrisu ali vsaj spremembi določbe.

• Jezik: Slovenski jezik
• Ključne besede: 433. OZ, solidarna odgovornost, prenos premoženja, pristop k dolgu, dolg premoženja, prevzem premoženja
• Vrsta gradiva: Magistrsko delo/naloga
• Organizacija: PF - Pravna fakulteta
• Leto izida: 2018
• PID: 20.500.12556/RUL-105380
• COBISS.SI-ID: 16502609
• Datum objave v RUL: 23.11.2018

Sekundarni jezik

• Jezik: Angleški jezik
• Naslov: Approaching the legal entity's debt upon the acquisition of the property

Izvleček

Article 433 of the Obligations Code (OZ) is a compulsory provision, which determines, that any person to whom any property, whole or an individual part thereof, is transferred by contract shall together with the previous holder be jointly and severally liable for the debts relating to such whole or part thereof, but only up to the value of the assets thereof. Stated provision indicates protection of creditors in cases of transferred assets of the debtor on the one hand, but on the other hand it threatens the legal security of the acquirer who becomes jointly liable for the debts of the acquired assets. According to the Companies Act-1 (ZGD-1), which lays down the basic corporate status rules for the operation of commercial companies, as a more specific law, the provision of Article 433 of OZ-1 cannot be applicable within the material status restructuring of the companies, within which the acquirer, as a universal legal successor, enters into all legal relations whose subject was the transferor company. On the contrary, in the acquisition of an asset deal, the acquirer assumes the operating assets of a business as a singular legal successor. In the business world, the advantage of the latter is that the acquirer may enjoy the newly acquired property right within the scope of his business and with ability to avoid the assumption of any liabilities. However, the Slovenian legislation, on the basis of the provision in question, enacts joint and several liability. The provision allows the possibility of its use in the context of insolvency proceedings with which it brings controversy and ambiguity, relative to the regulation of the protection of creditors and insolvency principles under the Financial Operations, insolvency proceedings and compulsory dissolution act (ZFPPIPP). In the field of labor law, the application of the provision is excluded due to a more specific regulation of the protection of workers in Article 75 of the Employment Relationships Act (ZDR-1). Comparatively, the German Civil Code contained a similar provision of 419 BGB, which was deleted, and in analogy the provision of Article 433 of the OZ could also be omitted in our legal order.

• Ključne besede: 433. OZ, joint liability, transfer of assets, approaching debt, debt of property, takeover