TFL Vsebine / Revija Pravnik

5

Dogovor o pogodbeni kazni, ki ga nekdanji družbeniki (sedanji delničarji) družbe dogovorijo in kot formalno sestavino vnesejo v družbeno pogodbo družbe, velja tudi po preoblikovanju v delniško družbo, ne glede na to, da ni vpisan v statut kot njegova formalna sestavina. Ta dogovor bi namreč med osebami, ki so ga dogovorile, učinkoval tudi, če v družbeno pogodbo ne bi bil vpisan – je zgolj njena formalna sestavina, ki učinkuje tudi zunaj družbene pogodbe. Ker je zgolj formalna sestavina družbene pogodbe, z njo ni konstitutivno vezan, v smislu nastanka, vsebine in prenehanja. Smiselno enako pa dovoljujejo tudi delniška pravila, ki ne prepovedujejo vzporednih obligacijskih dogovorov med delničarji. Zato se to razmerje med nekdanjimi družbeniki, zdaj delničarji, nadaljuje. Meje dopustne avtonomije na področju urejanja s statutom so ožje, kot so v pravu družb z omejeno odgovornostjo (načelo statutarne strogosti). Vendar tudi delniško pravo delničarjem ne prepoveduje sklepanja posebnih (obligacijskih) dogovorov. Gre za obligacijske sporazume, ki na neki način dograjujejo, dopolnjujejo oziroma zaokrožajo statutarno ureditev (nem. Satzungsergänzende Nebenabreden). Taki dogovori so lahko kot formalna sestavina vključeni v besedilo statuta, ali pa so dogovorjeni in sklenjeni brez vnosa v statut, torej »zunajstatutarno«. V obeh položajih vežejo le tiste, ki so jih dogovorili, presojajo pa se po pravilih obligacijskega prava.

An agreement on a contractual penalty that the former partners—now shareholders—inserted as a formal clause in the company’s articles of association remains valid after the company is transformed into a joint-stock company, even though the clause is no longer reproduced in the statute. Such an agreement would bind the parties even if it had never been included in the articles of association; its incorporation was merely formal, and its effectiveness extends beyond the articles of themselves. Because the penalty clause is merely a formal component of the articles of association, it is not constitutively bound by it, in terms of its formation, content and termination. The shareholders’ rules, which do not prohibit parallel obligation agreements between shareholders, also allow the same. Therefore, this relationship between the former partners, now shareholders, continues. Although the scope of autonomous regulation in a company’s statute is narrower under stock-company law than under the law of limited-liability companies (the principle of statutory strictness), stockcompany law still allows shareholders to conclude special (obligational) agreements. These are obligation agreements that in some way build on, supplement or round off the statutory regulation (German: Satzungsergänzende Nebenabreden). Such agreements can be included as a formal component in the text of the statute, or they can be agreed and concluded without being included in the statute, i.e. “outside the statute”. In either case they are binding only on those who agreed on them, and are assessed under the general law of obligations.

The Impact of a Change in Legal Organisational Form on the Contractual Penalty Agreed in the Partnership