TFL Vsebine / Pravni letopis

Četudi je bil institut spregleda pravne osebnosti v Sloveniji uzakonjen pred več kot dvajsetimi leti, je v sodni praksi zelo malo primerov uspešne uveljavitve odgovornosti družbenikov za obveznosti družbe na tej pravni podlagi. V preteklosti je bil eden od razlogov za to odgovornost družbenikov za obveznosti izbrisanih družb. Upniki imajo v postopkih, v katerih uveljavljajo spregled pravne osebnosti, težek položaj zaradi informacijske asimetrije in procesnih pravil o trditvenem in dokaznem bremenu. To utegne spremeniti novejša sodna praksa, ki v nekaterih primerih izjemoma dovoljuje informativne dokaze. Tudi obrnjeno dokazno breme pri dokazovanju subjektivnega elementa iz četrte alineje 8. člena ZGD-1 bi olajšalo položaj upnikov. Kljub interesom upnikov pa mora ostati spregled pravne osebnosti izjema, saj bi njegova prepogosta uporaba lahko ogrozila pravni institut kapitalskih družb.

Despite the fact that the institute disregard of legal personality (“lifting the corporate veil”) was introduced in Slovene legislation more than twenty years ago, in the case law the creditors have seldom success by enacting this legal institute. In the past one of the reasons was the responsibility of the shareholders for liabilities of erased companies. The process situation of the creditors is difficult due to the information asymmetry and the burden of proof. This may change the recent case-law that, in some cases, exceptionally allows informative evidence. The position of creditors could also be facilitated by reversed burden of proof in proving the subjective element from the 4. Indent 8. Article Slovene Companies Act. Despite the interest of the creditors the disregard of legal personality has to remain the exception. The use of this institute on excessively frequent basis could threaten the institute of company limited by shares.

The Disregard of Legal Personality in Slovenian Case Law