The contemporary stand among scientists is that the role of the state, within mixed market economies, should be reduced to the task of ensuring the institutional framework in order to protect the free market. However, occurrences of the “too-big-to-fail” entities constitute a challenge for the government regarding its ability to manage economic affairs in the traditional manner. Given that the nature of these entities makes them relevant on the verge of their own collapse, the authors focused on the legal and economic aftermath of their failures. The authors undertook extensive research into this topic with the primary goal of arguing that government regulation, in the cases of collapsing “too-big-to-fail” entities, is necessary for achieving stability of the system. After researching of the government’s role both in theory and practice, the authors displayed the findings of the analysis of the legal possibilities within the bankruptcy law of the Republic of Croatia. The historical and practical context of the research is the implementation of the legislation in the complex case of Agrokor Group. Ultimately, the authors argue that the magnitude of the collapsing “too-big-to-fail” company requires government intervention in order to preserve economic stability in the region, in addition to maximizing social welfare.
U modernim demokratskim državama poduzetnička i tržišna sloboda, odnosno tržište, tržišno gospodarstvo, smatraju se temeljom gospodarskog ustroja, ali i kao ljudsko pravo i temeljna sloboda koja uživa ustavnopravnu zaštitu. Ipak empirijska analiza i doktrina potvrđuju kako nema ekonomskog sustava, pa ni tržišta, koje nije više ili manje uređeno. Također, upozoravaju kako uvjeti na tržištu bitno utječu na ostvarivanje i razvoj poduzetništva. Stoga i nije pravo pitanje je li uloga države u reguliranju poduzetništva nužna. Pravo je pitanje kada, gdje i kako u pravno-ekonomskoj sferi država treba usmjeriti i regulirati poduzetnička kretanja i razvoj te kada je potrebno njeno izravno angažiranje. Polazeći od teze kako se država ne može u potpunosti temeljiti na načelu laissez-faire, jer zakonodavac mora moći ispraviti nepoželjne učinke djelovanja mehanizma tržišnog gospodarstva, postavlja se pitanje - treba li onemogućiti pripajanje trgovačkim društvima kod kojih postoji stečajni razlog, odnosno nad kojima je pokrenut stečajni postupak? Namjera je autora upozoriti na prazninu koja predstavlja rizik, bez obzira na postojeće i u velikoj mjeri kvalitetne mehanizme koji postoje za sprječavanje zloupotreba.
Funkcionalizacija hrvatskog stečajnog prava (i postupka) mora se shvatiti kao širi proces od obične recepcije stranih pravnih instituta i ad hoc rješenja za saniranje trenutnih ekonomskih i socijalnih posljedica. Uzimajući u obzir eklektičnost pristupa izmjenama stečajnih propisa, opravdano je postaviti pitanje: koji je cilj stečajnog postupka i u čiju se korist on vodi? Navedeno posebno dolazi do izražaja jer se u praktičnoj primjeni propisa o stečaju „prelamaju“ interesi više zainteresiranih sudionika (države, vjerovnika /običnih i privilegiranih/, radnika, stečajnih upravitelja, bivših vlasnika pa i širi društveni interesi). Stoga autor, analizirajući interese navedenih stranaka, tijela i sudionika stečajnog postupka, ukazuje na ograničene mogućnosti postizanja normativno definiranih stečajno-pravnih ciljeva. Svakako smatramo bitnim istaknuti kako prostor koji ovdje imamo ne dopušta detaljnu raščlambu ove problematike, pa smo prinuđeni isključivo se ograničiti, po mišljenju autora, na neke aspekte nove stečajne regulative koja najbolje definira predmet rada.
The principle of equality of arms requires that each party to the proceedings should have equal opportunity to present facts and support them with their evidence without of putting any party in a substantial disadvantage. (Case LB INTERFINANZ AG against Croatian, judgment, 27.03.2008 ., application no. 29549/04.). In terms of the procedural balance between the parties, this principle constitutes one of the essential elements of the right to a fair trial. However, the question of equality of arms is again raised in Bankruptcy Act (Official Gazette, 71/15. hereinafter: BA). BA has kept solution in which the creditor is able to initiate bankruptcy proceedings if he makes the existence of its claims likely possible and the existence of the reasons for bankruptcy. However, the legislator has retained the disputed solution in which the probability of the existence of the creditor claim can be proven by non-final judicial or non-final administrative decisions. As there are different solutions in terms of the above mentioned assumptions, the authors will focus on general statements based on comparative experiences, without detail consideration of the numerous and specific comparative solutions. This paper discusses the practical, but also theoretical implications of positive legal solutions specifically analysing the law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in proceedings according to Art. 6 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), because we assume that these information play key role in the understanding of the issue concerned. In addition, authors are trying to get the answer on the question will overall unsatisfied indicators of bankruptcy proceedings, which are the result of structural problems, need “stringent” procedural measures to resolve that situation. The subject of the paper is also a nomotehnical dimension of this issue, because the same solution was in the old Bankruptcy Act (Official Gazette, 44/96, 29/99, 129/00, 123/03, 82/06, 116/10, 25/12, and 45/13.) which suspended the Constitutional Court.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.