scholarly journals Intergenerational Transfer of Family-run Enterprises by Means of Civil Law in Serbia

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-137
Author(s):  
Vladimir Marjanski ◽  
Attila Dudás
Keyword(s):  
Limited Liability ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Single Family ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
Limited Partnership ◽  
Natural Person ◽  
Company Limited ◽  
Legal Difficulties ◽  
A Company ◽  
A Share

Family-run enterprises are business organisations in which the reins of control are concentrated in the hands of a single family or an individual who for the enterprise aims to continue operation through successive generations of the family. In Serbia, family-run companies usually begin as an individual entrepreneurship, a form of closed company (general and limited partnership) or relatively closed company (limited liability company). The legal difficulties that arise following the death of an individual entrepreneur (natural person) differ from those following the death of a member in a company (legal entity). Companies are imbued with rights and responsibilities separate from the personal rights and responsibilities of their members. Members of a company, including the head, are not considered owners of the company’s property in legal terms. Instead, they have shares in the company, and those shares entitle them to membership (management and proprietary) rights. Thus, when a member dies, the company’s property, in whole or in part, is not subject to inheritance (although that deceased member’s share is). This differs from the situation following an individual entrepreneur’s death. The law does not recognise a natural person conducting business as an individual entrepreneur as having two legal personalities (personal and business); everything is treated as personal. Therefore, all the assets and debts of a deceased individual entrepreneur are subject to inheritance, regardless of whether or not they were accrued in the course of business. The succession of a share following a member’s death is regulated separately for each company form, and all issues not governed by the Companies Act or a company’s incorporation document are subject to the rules of Serbia’s Law of Inheritance. Inheritance rules differ greatly for a share in a personal company (general or limited partnership) and a share in a capital company (limited liability or joint-stock company). In principle, whether or not a deceased member’s rights and responsibilities can be passed through inheritance depends on the company’s form, its incorporation document, and the relevance of the heirs’ connection to the deceased and the company. The less complicated these are, the fewer the legal obstacles to inheritance.

scholarly journals Authorized Failure: How is Company Status?

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fiany Alifia Lasnita ◽  
Muhamad Adji Rahardian Utama
Keyword(s):  
Limited Liability ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Company Limited ◽  
Proof Of Ownership ◽  
Personal Wealth ◽  
A Company ◽  
A Share

The sense of the limited liability company is a legal entity to be able to run a business that has a capital consisting of a share, which its owners have lots of stock. Because it is composed of capital over shares that can be traded, and changes to the ownership of the company can be done without the need for a dissolution of a company. Limited liability company is a business entity and the magnitude of the capital company which are poured in a basic budget. The wealth of the company separate from the personal wealth of the owners of the company so that it can have its own treasures. Each person can have more than one stock which can be a proof of ownership of a company. The owner of the stock itself has a limited liability, i.e. as much as their shares. In the establishment of limited liability company also required permission and also some important documents that should be owned by a limited liability company to be its foundation.

Selected problems concerning formation of a holding SE (societas europaea)

2003 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krzysztof Oplustil
Keyword(s):  
Limited Liability ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
European Company ◽  
European Company Law ◽  
Societas Europaea ◽  
Council Regulation ◽  
Operation Results ◽  
A Company

Formation of a holding SE is one of the four ways of establishing a European Company (societas europaea- ‘SE') as regulated in the Council Regulation No 2157/2001 on the Statute for a European Company (cited below: SE-Reg.). It is also an original way of European company law to create a joint stock company. It's true that companies are making use of the holding structure in order to combine their economic potentials and to create international groups of enterprises. But, as it was in the case of the formation of theAventis S.A., the holding structures usually come into existence by means of an increase of the subscribed capital in an existing company. The new shares are issued to the shareholders of another company who pay for it with the shares of their company. The operation results in formation of a holding structure in which the company that increased its capital, becomes a holding company dominating a company or companies the shares of which were contributed. The formation of a holding SE is guided by the similar idea: an exchange of the shares of national private or public limited liability companies into the shares of a European Company. However, in contrast to the Aventis like-cases, the dominant company, i.e. the SE, does not exist yet but has to be created by the companies according to the provisions of the SE-Regulation. This fact as well as many legal gaps existing in the scanty regulation of holding formation and the necessity to apply both the provisions of European and national law concomitantly may lead to many legal problems some of which will be presented below.

scholarly journals Legal status of the company's share in own authorized capital under the Law of Ukraine “On limited and additional liability companies”: problems of legal regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol 11/1 (-) ◽  
pp. 31-36
Author(s):  
Volodymyr TSIUPRYK
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
General Meeting ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
A Company ◽  
Authorized Capital ◽  
A Share

Introduction. Nowadays, the issue of determining the legal status of the company's share in the own authorized capital of LLC and TDV has become quite acute, as evidenced by the adoption on July 28, 2021 by the Commercial Court of Cassation in Case № 904/1112/20, in which the Court established a new approach legal nature of such a phenomenon and expressed his own position on the understanding of the legislation concerning the legal status of the share of LLC and TDV in its own authorized capital. Given that a limited liability company is the most popular type of legal entity that is chosen to conduct business in Ukraine, the analysis of this issue is relevant. Some scientific value for the development of the transfer of the participant's share are the works of individual authors devoted to the study of the legal nature of the share in the authorized capital but the problems arising around the legal status of the company. in their own authorized capital in these works were only mentioned along with others, but did not receive a detailed separate study. The purpose of the paper is to analyze the normative regulation of the legal status of the company's share in the own authorized capital of LLCs and ALCs, identification of shortcomings in their legal regulation and implementation, as well as the search for ways to eliminate them. Results. One of the most relevant decisions concerning the subject of this article is the Judgment of the Commercial Court of Cassation in case № 904/1112/20 of July 28, 2021. The court in this case found that the votes attributable to the share belonging to the company itself are not taken into account when determining the results of voting at the general meeting of participants on any issues. However, Ukrainian legislation does not contain any direct norms that would prohibit the exercise of the right to manage a company in relation to itself on the basis of a share in its own authorized capital. That is why the company cannot be a participant in relation to itself, although they seem logical, but do not have sufficient regulatory support, and therefore do not allow to be firmly convinced of their compliance with the law. In view of this, it can be stated that there is a significant gap in the national legislation on this issue, which, in our opinion, the Court failed to “fill” with this decision in the case. Conclusion. In the Ukrainian legislation at the level of the Law of Ukraine “On Limited and Additional Liability Companies” Article 25 defines the possibility for a company to acquire a share in its own authorized capital. However, the regulation of the legal status of such a share cannot be called sufficient, due to which in practice there are certain problems in the implementation of the provisions of the legislation concerning the share of the company in its own authorized capital. The solution of these legal problems is necessary to ensure the highest quality and clarity of the law, as well as to form case law with common approaches to understanding a single rule.

scholarly journals Topical issues of digitalization in corporate law

2021 ◽  
Vol 118 ◽  
pp. 04012
Author(s):  
Elena Viktorovna Oleynik ◽  
Olga Mikhailovna Shevchenko
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Financial Assets ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
Digital Currency ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Decentralized Autonomous Organizations ◽  
Russian Law ◽  
A Company

The purpose of the study is to analyze the provisions of the novelties of the Russian legislation on digital financial assets and digital currency. The methodological basis was the method of comparative legal analysis, using which the authors identify general patterns and features of the legal status of Russian digital joint-stock companies and decentralized autonomous organizations widely discussed in foreign literature. The results of the study were conclusions about the significant differences between the above organizations. A company issuing digital shares, under Russian law, differs from an ordinary non-public joint stock company by limiting the circulation of digital shares within the framework of a digital platform. Unlike the decentralized autonomous organization, it has legal entity and governing bodies. It was also concluded that there is a significantly greater variety of rights of holders of foreign token-shares in comparison with the rights of shareholders of Russian digital joint stock companies. The novelty of the research is contained in the results of the analysis and doctrinal interpretation of the norms of Russian federal laws concerning digital shares. So, in particular, it was established that such are recognized at the same time as securities and digital rights. Such a legal structure appears to be unnecessarily complex. According to Russian law, digital shares differ from ordinary shares in the form of certification of shareholders “rights, while no differences have been revealed in the scope of shareholders” rights.

The Brief History of the New-York Coffeehouse Company Limited

2021 ◽  
pp. 95-104
Author(s):  
Sára Czina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Great Depression ◽  
Company Limited ◽  
The Everyday ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of

At the turn of the 20th century, Budapest was famous for its Coffeehouse Culture. One of the most popular Café was the New-York Coffeehouse; today, it is remembered for its literary life. After 20 years of operation, in 1913, new people bought the tenant’s rights and established the first Coffeehouse joint-stock company in Hungary, called New-York coffeehouse Company Limited. This paper aims to analyze the operation of the Company in relation to the stock transfers, analysis of its profitability, and the changes in the transformations in the shares. The main goal was to figure out how the profitability and the stock transfers were connected to the contemporary social and economic circumstances. The years of the World Wars, Revolutions, the Great Depression, and the cultural/social life of the twenties had their deep effects on the life of the Company. The changes were perceptible for the public, too. Many articles were published about the hardships of the Company and the changing atmosphere of the Coffeehouse. These were different; not all of them damaged the interest of the Company Limited equally. Still, the difficulties influenced the stock transfers, profitability, and the everyday life of the Managers and Shareholders. These circumstances are parallel to the changes of the Company.

scholarly journals Share capital in the Polish simple joint-stock company in light of the existing law and proposed European legislation

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 77-94
Author(s):  
Iwo Jarosz
Keyword(s):  
Limited Liability ◽  
Regulatory Reform ◽  
Capital Requirements ◽  
Regulatory Competition ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
Share Capital ◽  
European Legislation ◽  
Legislative Changes

In recent years we have witnessed an almost unprecedented effort of legislators and legal academics in Europe to make limited liability companies in various jurisdictions more modern, simpler and more accessible. These endeavors are usually related to the liberalization of statutory requirements regarding the minimum share capital amounts. Lively debates among academics and practitioners, as well as regulatory competition, seem to be the factors making the legislative changes dynamic and evolutionary. The issue of limited liability companies’ regulatory reform were also the subject of proposed European legislation, including the now abandoned proposal of a harmonised single-member limited liability company model known as Societas Unius Personae SUP. In Poland there has also been, for  almost a decade, a discussion on whether and how to follow the example of Germany and its Unternehmergesellschaft and other European countries and liberalize the capital requirements for the Polish limited liability company. Lately the Polish legislator has introduced the so-called simple joint-stock company prosta spółka akcyjna, which had been drafted to be an attractive offer for start-ups, aiming, in the perception of its proponents, to achieve the modernization and simplification desired by contemporary legislators and supposedly accomplished in other jurisdictions, all the while maintaining serious levels of creditor protection. The author employs formal-dogmatic and comparative methods to describe the capital structure of the new company type and to confront it with certain other statutory developments, especially the Societas Unius Personae as a serious and well-thought-out, nonetheless failed venture, to try to assess the solutions set forth by the Polish legislator.Kapitał zakładowy prostej spółki akcyjnej w świetle dotychczasowych przepisów i projektów prawodawstwa europejskiegoW ostatnich latach europejscy ustawodawcy i przedstawiciele nauki prawa podejmowali nieomalże bezprecedensowe wysiłki w kierunku modernizacji, uproszczenia i zwiększenia dostępności spółek z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością. Działania te zazwyczaj zmierzały do liberalizacji ustawowych wymogów dotyczących minimalnych kwot kapitału zakładowego. Czynnikami dynamizującymi zmiany legislacyjne wydają się żywe dyskusje w środowisku akademickim oraz na łonie praktyki, a także konkurencja regulacyjna. Kwestie reformy spółek z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością były również przedmiotem projektów prawodawstwa europejskiego, w tym projektu dyrektywy w sprawie zharmonizowanego modelu spółki z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością jednoosobowej znanego jako Societas Unius Personae SUP. Także w Polsce od prawie dekady toczy się dyskusja w przedmiocie zmian dotyczących spółek z o.o., w szczególności tego, czy polskie ustawodawstwo powinno podążyć za przykładem Niemiec i znanej z niemieckiego porządku prawnego Unternehmergesellschaft oraz innych krajów europejskich i zliberalizować wymogi kapitałowe dla tego typu spółek. Sejm przegłosował niedawno ustawę wprowadzającą tak zwaną prostą spółkę akcyjną. Ten nowy typ spółki ma w założeniu stanowić atrakcyjną propozycję dla start-upów, prowadząc — zdaniem jej zwolenników — do modernizacji i uproszczenia pożądanego przez współczesnych prawodawców przy jednoczesnym utrzymaniu stosownego poziomu ochrony wierzycieli. Autor próbuje ocenić rozwiązania zaproponowane przez polskiego ustawodawcę w zakresie struktury kapitałowej nowego typu spółki, konfrontując je z innymi rozwiązaniami, w tym w szczególności z projektem Societas Unius Personae — przedsięwzięciem ostatecznie nieudanym, choć przemyślanym i zasługującym na uwagę.

The Evolution of Associated Forms of Enterprises and the Genesis of the Share Institution

2008 ◽  
pp. 121-135
Author(s):  
K. Krinichansky
Keyword(s):  
Capital Market ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Motivational Factors ◽  
Institutional Factors ◽  
Joint Stock Company ◽  
Sufficient Condition ◽  
Stock Company ◽  
Financial Instrument ◽  
Business Enterprises

The article expounds and summarizes the main economic and institutional factors and prerequisites for the formation of business enterprises in Europe in the X-XVIII centuries. The author shows that the later form of associated enterprises - joint stock company - had been preceded at an earlier stage of genesis by other forms of enterprises, each of which brought about its own innovations in the development of the share institution. The existence of limited liability corporations cannot be regarded as a sufficient condition for the transformation of the share into a financial instrument and for the formation of capital market. Some of these conditions may be the appearance of new motivational factors of using shares and corporations based on them and the formation of specialized infrastructure supplement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document