Субсидіарна відповідальність контролерів юридичної особи у контексті трансформації природи корпорацій у ХХІ ст.

Трембіч Андрій

Відомості про автора
ORCID ID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-1057-2631

Дата публікації: 03.12.2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.69724/2786-8834-2024-3-3-148-195

Ключові слова: субсидіарна відповідальність, контролери юридичної осо- би, корпоративна завіса, корпоративне управління, захист кредиторів, українське корпора- тивне право, англо-американське корпоративне право, німецьке корпоративне право, відпо- відальність контролерів, запобігання неплатоспроможності, достатність капіталу, правова природа капіталу, управлінська відповідальність, управління ризиками.

Завантажити PDF
3-й випуск. Обкладинка

Анотація

У статті досліджується субсидіарна відповідальність контролерів юридичної особи в умовах трансформації природи корпорації у ХХІ столітті, з акцентом на еволюцію законодавчих підходів до захисту прав кредиторів і забезпечення стабільності корпоративного управління. Автор аналізує концепцію «piercing the corporate veil» (проникнення за корпоративну вуаль) та її адаптацію до українських правових реалій, зокрема, в контексті розмежування відповідальності контролерів у випадках зловживання правом, неналежного виконання обов’язків або нехтування економічною стійкістю компанії. Дослідження розглядає унікальні особливості та відмінності українського підходу порівняно з правовими системами англо-американської традиції та німецького корпоративного права, де субсидіарна відповідальність контролерів часто базується на принципах акціонерної солідарності та доктрині достатньої капіталізації. Окрему увагу приділено доктринальним підходам до субсидіарної відповідаль- ності, правовій природі капіталу юридичних осіб та питанням щодо умов застосування персональної відповідальності контролерів, включаючи роль операційних рішень та управ- лінських зловживань у виникненні боргових зобов’язань. Стаття підкреслює ключову роль контролерів у запобіганні банкрутству шляхом належного управління активами та відповідальності за фінансове планування, а також ідентифікує існуючі правові механізми, що об- межують їхню відповідальність за боргові зобов’язання компанії. У підсумку наводяться рекомендації щодо вдосконалення української законодавчої бази з урахуванням міжнародного досвіду, зокрема в аспектах, пов’язаних із запобіганням ризиковим операціям і встановленням більш чітких критеріїв для притягнення контролерів до субсидіарної відповідальності у випадках корпоративної неспроможності.

Як цитувати

In accordance with DSTU 8302:2015:
Трембіч А. Субсидіарна відповідальність контролерів юридичної особи у контексті трансформації природи корпорацій у ХХІ ст. Цивілістична платформа. 2024. № 3. С. 148-195. https://doi.org/10.69724/2786-8834-2024-3-3-148-195

According to the international style of APA:
Trembich A. (2024) Subsidiary liability of legal Entity Controllers in the Context of Corporate Transformation in the 21st Century. С. P. Journal, 3. https://doi.org/10.69724/2786-8834-2024-3-3-148-195 [in Ukrainian].

Посилання

  1. Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2000). Hard and Soft Law in International Governance. International Organization. Доступно на Cambridge Core: https:// www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-organization/article/abs/hard-and- soft-law-in-international-governance/EC8091A89687FDF7FC9027D1717538BF.
  2. Ahmad, H. M. (2022). The jurisdictional vacuum: transnational corporate human rights claims in common law home states. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 70(2), 227–229. Retrieved from Oxford Academic: https://academic.oup.com/ ajcl/article/70/2/227/6772608.
  3. Alexander, K. (2009). Bank resolution regimes: balancing prudential regulation and shareholder rights. Journal of Corporate Law Studies, 9(3), pp. 233–254.
  4. Alexander, K. (2022). Principles of Banking Regulation. Cambridge University Press. Alting, C. (1994). Piercing the Corporate Veil in American and German Law: Liability of Individuals and Entities – A Comparative View. Tulsa Journal of Comparative & International Law, pp. 103–106.
  5. Andrews, N. (1998). «What would Sir Samuel Griffith have said? Postmodernism in the 1990s company law classroom.» Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law, 3(2). https://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MurUEJL/1998/17.html Armour, J. (2006). Legal capital: An outdated concept? European Business Organization Law Review, pp. 150–152.
  6. Arnim, C. von. (2000). U. S. Corporation und Aktiengesellschaft im Rechtsvergleich – Haftungsdurchgriff im deutschen Kapitalgesellschaftsrecht und Piercing the Corporate Veil im Recht der U. S.-amerikanischen Corporation.
  7. Arnold, M. (2012). Durchgriffshaftung und Verhaltenssteuerung im Konzernrecht. – Frankfurt am Main: Lang.
  8. Bainbridge, S. M. (2004). The Business Judgment Rule as Abstention Doctrine. Vanderbilt Law Review. Vol. 57, No1.
  9. Bainbridge, S. M. (2005). Abolishing veil piercing. University of Illinois Law Review, 2005(2).
  10. Baskin, J. B., & Miranti, P. J. (1999). A History of Corporate Finance. Cambridge University Press.
  11. Baums, T., & Hopt, K. J. (2010). Haftung und Verantwortung im Unternehmensrecht. Tьbingen: Mohr Siebeck.
  12. Behme, C. (2016). The principle of mutual recognition in the european internal market with special regard to the cross-border mobility of companies. European Company and Financial Law Review, 13(2), pp. 345–352. Доступно на De Gruyter: https:// www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/ecfr-2016-0031/html.
  13. Belenzon, S., Lee, H., & Patacconi, A. (2018). Towards a legal theory of the firm: The effects of enterprise liability on asset partitioning, decentralization, and corporate group growth. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series.
  14. Beregovyi, D., & Stuyck, J. (2014). Parental liability for competition law violations: Lessons for emerging markets. Central European University.
  15. Bergmann, A., Drescher, I., Fleischer, H., & Goette, W. (2020). Vom Konzern zum Einheitsunternehmen: aktuelle Entwicklungsperspektiven des deutschen und europдischen Konzernrechts.
  16. Bicker, E. T. (2006). Creditor protection in the corporate group. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=906742.
  17. Black, B. S., & Kraakman, R. (1996). A self-enforcing model of corporate law. Harvard Law Review, 109(8), pp. 1911–1982;
  18. Blumberg, P. I. (1987). The Law of Corporate Groups: Tort, Contract, and Other Common Law Problems in the Substantive Law of Parent and Subsidiary Corporations. – Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
  19. Blumberg, P. I. (1990). The Corporate Entity in an Era of Multinational Corporations. Del. J. Corp. L., 15.
  20. Blumberg, P. I. (2005). The transformation of modern corporation law: The law of corporate groups. Connecticut Law Review, 37(3).
  21. Bold, U. (2021). Corporate Law Principles versus Corporate Groups. Eworkcapital. Boot, A. W. (2023). Banking and Financial Institutions: A Risk Management Perspective.McGraw-Hill Education.
  22. Butler, S. J. (2000). Models of Modern Corporations: A Comparative Analysis of German and US Corporate Structures. Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, pp. 30–32.
  23. Calder, A. (2008). Corporate Governance: A Practical Guide to the Legal Frameworks and International Codes of Practice.
  24. Calliess, G. P., & Renner, M. (2009). From Soft Law to Hard Code: The Juridification of Global Governance. Ratio Juris.
  25. Casper, M. (2008). Liability of the managing director and the shareholder in the GmbH (private limited company) in crisis. German Law Journal, 8(4), pp. 1112–1120. Cambridge University Press: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german- law-journal/article/liability-of-the-managing-director-and-the-shareholder-in-the- gmbh-private-limited-company-in-crisis/7C89AD8D17791363CEEFD1A60BF2C7 9F.
  26. Cheffins, B. R. (2020). Corporate Ownership and Control: British Business Transformed. Oxford University Press.
  27. Cheng, T. K. (2010). Form and substance of the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil. Mississippi Law Journal, 80.
  28. Cilliers, J. (2002). Liability of a holding company for the debts of its insolvent subsidiary. University of Western Australia Law Review, 30.
  29. Coelho, P. R. P., McClure, J. E., & Spry, J. A. (2003). The social responsibility of corporate management: A classical critique. American Journal of Business, pp. 67–69. Retrieved from ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Philip-Coelho/ publication/227359320_The_Social_Responsibility_of_Corporate_ Management_A_Classical_Critique/links/5a83c9c9aca272d6501ed476/The-Social- Responsibility-of-Corporate-Management-A-Classical-Critique.pdf.
  30. Cohen, D. L. (1998). Theories of the Corporation and the Limited Liability Company: How Should Courts and Legislatures Articulate Rules for Piercing the Veil? Oklahoma Law Review, 51, pp. 427–450.
  31. Collins, H. (1990). Ascription of legal responsibility to groups in complex patterns of economic integration. Modern Law Review, 53, pp. 731–755.
  32. Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court (June 10, 2021) Postanovа u spravi [Resolution in case] Legal position. No. 5023/2837/11. https:// zakononline.com.ua/court-decisions/show/120341855. [in Ukrainian].
  33. Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court (June 19, 2024) Postanovа u spravi [Resolution in case] No. 906/1155/20 (906/1113/21). https:// zakononline.com.ua/court-decisions/show/120341855. [in Ukrainian].
  34. Cutler, A. C. (2008). «Problematizing corporate social responsibility under conditions of late capitalism and postmodernity.» In Authority in the Global Political Economy, pp. 205–230. Retrieved from Springer: https://link.springer.com/chapt er/10.1057/9780230584297_8.
  35. Davies, P. (2022). Gower and Davies’ Principles of Modern Company Law. Sweet & Maxwell.
  36. Dean, G., & Clarke, F. (1993). Law and accounting: The separate legal entity principle and consolidation accounting. Australian Business Law Review, 21, pp. 456–475.
  37. Dess, T. (2021). The protection of corporate creditors under Ethiopian share company law in light of international recommendations. Journal of Law, Policy, and Globalization, 96, pp. 76–82.
  38. Dignam, A., & Oh, P. (2020). Rationalising Corporate Disregard. Legal Studies.
  39. Dine, J. (2000). The Governance of Corporate Groups. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  40. Ellis, C. M. (2022). Enemy of All Mankind: Enshrining Universal Civil Jurisdiction in Human Rights Law to Hold Multinational Corporations Accountable in Our Globalized World. Columbia Undergraduate L. Rev., 19, pp. 75–76.
  41. Emmenegger, P., & Lutz, P. (2019). Financial Crises and the Limits of Capitalism: Essays on History and Theory. Routledge, p. 48.
  42. Emmerich, V. (2013). Konzernrecht: Kommentar. – Mьnchen: Beck.
  43. Endres, D., & Ditsch, S. (1999). German Corporate Tax Planning. International Tax Journal, 11.
  44. Engle, E., & Danyliuk, T. (2014). Emulating the German two-tier board and worker participation in US law: A stakeholder theory of the firm.
  45. Ferri, G. (2016). Bank Liquidity and the Global Financial Crisis: Perspectives and Developments. Springer, pp. 88–90.
  46. Fleischer, H. (2011). Corporate Governance und Haftung der Geschдftsfьhrung.
  47. Juristenzeitung (JZ). Bd. 66, Nr. 8.
  48. Fleischer, H. (2011). Corporate Governance und Haftung der Geschдftsfьhrung.
  49. Juristenzeitung, 66(8), 381–395.
  50. Freedman, J. (2000). Limited liability: Large company theory and small firms. Modern Law Review, 63(3), pp. 326–329.
  51. Fьlbier, R. U., & Klein, M. (2015). Balancing Past and Present: The Impact of Accounting Internationalisation on German Accounting Regulations. Accounting History, pp. 15–17.
  52. Fung, K. (2020). The Proper Role of Agency in Corporate Group Liability. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, pp. 15–17.
  53. Gelb, H. (2013). Piercing the corporate veil: The undercapitalization factor. Chicago-
  54. Kent Law Review, 59(1), pp. 17–25.
  55. Gelter, M. (2009). Dark Side of Shareholder Influence: Managerial Autonomy and Stakeholder Orientation in Comparative Corporate Governance. Harv. Int’l L. J., 50, pp. 25–27.
  56. Gerner-Beuerle, C. (2021). The Duty of Care and the Business Judgment Rule: A Case Study in Legal Transplants and Local Narratives.
  57. Gevurtz, F. A. (2012). Corporate Governance after the Financial Crisis. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  58. Gцrtz, M. (2007). The Federal Court of Justice’s concept for piercing the corporate veil due to the destruction of a limited liability company. Client Newsletter, 9, pp. 1–10. Govender, T. N. (2019). An analysis of lifting of the corporate veil in light of s20 (9) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008. Retrieved from Core.ac.uk: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/222783087.pdf.
  59. Gower, L., & Davies, P. (2021). The Principles of Modern Company Law. Sweet & Maxwell.
  60. Graham, A. (2020). The Cathedral and the Haystack: One View of Limited Liability and Corporate Groups. Victoria University of Wellington Legal Research Paper. Retrieved from SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_ id=3651546
  61. Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court (May 25, 2021) Postanovа u spravi [Resolution in case] No. 761/45721/16-ts. reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/97220727. [in Ukrainian].
  62. Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court (September 28, 2021) Postanovа u spravi [Resolution in case] in case No. 761/45721/16-ts. Legal position https:// zakononline.com.ua/court-decisions/show/101473371?from=761%2F45721%2F16- %D1%86 . [in Ukrainian].
  63. Grigoleit, H. C. (2016). Das Haftungssystem des GmbH-Gesetzes: Zwischen Subsidiaritдt und Solidaritдt. Zeitschrift fur Unternehmens-und Gesellschaftsrecht. Bd. 45, Nr. 3. Grigoleit, H. C. (2019). Regulierung von Related Party Transactions im Kontext des deutschen Konzernrechts. Zeitschrift fьr Unternehmens-und Gesellschaftsrecht. Habersack, M., Verse, D. (2019). GmbH-Recht: Handbuch. – Munchen: Beck. Hдnisch, D. (2007). The liability of shareholders for obligations of the company in Germany and the People’s Republic of China. City University of Hong Kong, pp. 14–16.
  64. Hдnisch, J. (2007). Gesellschaftsrechtliche Durchgriffshaftung in Deutschland und den USA: Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung zur Haftung der Gesellschafter fur Verbindlichkeiten der Gesellschaft. Berlin: Springer.
  65. Hansmann, H., & Kraakman, R. (2000). The essential role of organizational law. Yale Law Journal, 110(3), pp. 387–440;
  66. Hansmann, H., Kraakman, R., & Squire, R. (2005). Law and the Rise of the Firm. Harvard Law Review.
  67. Harris, R. (2009). The Institutional Dynamics of Early Modern Eurasian Trade. Legal History Journal, pp. 15–16.
  68. Harris, R. (2009). The Law and Economics of Corporate Governance: The Case for Subsidiary Liability. Stanford Journal of Law, Business & Finance. Vol. 14, No3. Hawk, B. (2016). Law and Commerce in Pre-Industrial Societies. Brill.
  69. Heindler, F. (2020). National Report on Austria. In Groups of Companies: A Comparative Law Overview. Springer.
  70. Hellwig, M. (2021). Systemic Risk in the Financial Sector: Lessons from the Financial Crisis. Journal of Financial Stability, pp. 123–126.
  71. Hendrickson, J. (2021). Ethical Issues in Accounting: A Practical Approach. Routledge, pp. 19–22.
  72. Hoffmann, D. (2018). Corporate Veil and Limited Liability in German Corporate Law.
  73. European Business Organization Law Review, pp. 27–29.
  74. Hoffmann-Becking, M. (2009). Konzernhaftung und Verantwortlichkeit im deutschen Aktienrecht. Die Aktiengesellschaft (AG). Bd. 54, Nr. 4.
  75. Hopt, K. J. (2011). Comparative Corporate Governance: The State of the Art and International Regulation. The American Journal of Comparative Law, pp. 15–18.
  76. Hopt, K. J., & Leyens, P. C. (2004). Corporate Groups in Germany. Journal of Corporate Law Studies.
  77. Hopt, K. J. (2024). Groups of Companies: A Comparative Study on the Economics, Law, and Regulation of Corporate Groups.
  78. Kahan D. R. (2009). Shareholder Liability for Corporate Torts: A Historical Perspective Georgetown Law Journal. Vol. 97. No4.
  79. Kallmeyer, C. (2016). Haftungsfragen bei der faktischen Geschдftsfьhrung in der GmbH Neue Zeitschrift fьr Gesellschaftsrecht (NZG). Bd. 19, Nr. 10.
  80. Khimji, M. F., & Nicholls, C. C. (2015). Corporate Veil Piercing and Allocation of Liability: Diagnosis and Prognosis. Banking & Finance Law Review, pp. 37–39.
  81. Kindler, P., & Lutter, M. (2014). Konzernrecht: Handbuch. Mьnchen: Beck. Kistoffersson, E. (2023). Taxation of companies in economic and financial distress: 2022 EATLP Congress Vienna 16–18 June 2022. Torrossa.
  82. Knappke, T. C. (2008). No liability of shareholders for material undercapitalization of a GmbH. Corporate Law Newsletter, October.
  83. Koch, H. (2002). Die Durchgriffshaftung im deutschen und europдischen
  84. Gesellschaftsrecht. Zeitschrift fьr Unternehmens- und Gesellschaftsrecht. Bd. 31, Nr. 2. Koenig, C. (2017). An economic analysis of the single economic entity doctrine in EU competition law. Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 13(2), pp. 281–309. Retrieved from Oxford Academic: https://academic.oup.com/jcle/article-abstract/13/2/281/3885843.
  85. Koenig, C. (2024). The Rise of Corporate Cross-Entity Liability: Which Doctrine for What Purpose? European Business Law Review, 35(2), pp. 85–87.
  86. Kraakman, R. et al. (2009). The Anatomy of Corporate Law: A Comparative and
  87. Functional Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  88. Krawczyk-Giehsmann, A. (2020). Shareholders’ Liability for Ruining a Company in Light of the CJEU’s Judgment in Kornhaas. European Business Organization Law Review, pp. 156–158.
  89. Leyens, P. C., & Faure, M. G. (2018). Directors’ and Officers’ Liability: Economic Analysis. De Gruyter, pp. 18–20.
  90. Lцbbe, M. (2013). Konzernverantwortung und Umwandlungsrecht. Zeitschrift fьr das gesamte Handels- und Wirtschaftsrecht, 177, 518–541.
  91. Louison, J. (2022). Insolvency rights and fiduciary duties in bankruptcy cases.
  92. International Insolvency Review, 31(1), pp. 89–101.
  93. Lowry, J. (2004). Lifting the corporate veil in European company law. European Business
  94. Organization Law Review, 5(1), pp. 157–178.
  95. Lutter, M. (2020). Hommelhoff, P. GmbH-Gesetz: Kommentar. Mьnchen: Beck.
  96. Zemliankin, A. I., Ilyina, H. O., Kocheshkova, I. M., & Trushkina, N. V. Lytvyn, I. V. & Shevchuk, K. S (20224). Theoretical foundations of venture fund operations and development prospects in Ukraine.Venture capital business in Ukraine: Current state and background of development. Menedzhment ta pidpryiemnytstvo v Ukraini: etapy stanovlennia i problemy rozvytku Scientific Journals and Conferences. https://science.lpnu.ua/sites/default/files/journal-paper/2022/ dec/29560/220972maket-398–405.pdf [in Ukrainian].
  97. Lytvyn, I. V., & Shevchuk, K. S. (2022). Venture business in Ukraine: Current state and historical development. Lviv Polytechnic National University. Retrieved from https://science.lpnu.ua/uk/smeu/vsi-vypusky/vypusk-4-nomer-2-2022/ venchurnyy-biznes-v-ukrayini-suchasnyy-stan-ta-peredistoriya [in Ukrainian].
  98. Maitland, I. (1994). The morality of the corporation: An empirical or normative disagreement? Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(3), pp. 450–452. Retrieved from JSTOR: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3857343.
  99. Makharoblishvili, G. (2016). Limited liability and entity shielding in corporate personality. In Todua N. (Ed.), Guram Natchkebia, 75. Tbilisi.
  100. Manning, M. R. (2010). There’s a Change in the Status Quo: Corporate Veil Piercing in Ohio after Dombroski v. WellPoint. Entrepreneurial Business Law Journal, 5, pp. 103–105. Retrieved from: https://kb.osu.edu/bitstreams/6848e821-fdec- 53b7-b317-fef922a7a125/download.
  101. Mдntysaari, P. (2010). Management of Risk: General Remarks. Springer.
  102. Marcantel, J. A. (2010). Because Judges Are Not Angels Either: Limiting Judicial Discretion by Introducing Objectivity into Piercing Doctrine. University of Kansas Law Review, 59, pp. 491–510.
  103. Matchavariani, S. (2015). Management of corporate groups in Germany and the US:
  104. Integration of management principles in Georgian law. Tbilisi.
  105. Matheson, J. H., & Eby, R. B. (2000). The Doctrine of Piercing the Veil in an Era of Multiple Limited Liability Entities: An Opportunity to Codify the Test for Waiving Owners’ Limited Liability Protection. Washington Law Review, 75, pp. 175–178.
  106. Merkt, H., & Spindler, G. (2006). Legal capital in Europe. De Gruyter Recht, pp. 166–168.
  107. Mevorach, I. (2013). The role of enterprise principles in shaping management duties at times of crisis. European Business Organization Law Review (EBOR), 14, pp. 21–42.
  108. Miguens, H. J. (2002). Liability of a parent corporation for the obligations of an insolvent subsidiary under American case law and Argentine law. American Bankruptcy Institute Law Review, 10, pp. 425–448.
  109. Miller, S. R. (1998). Piercing the Corporate Veil among Affiliated Companies in the European Community: A Comparative Analysis. International and Comparative Law Quarterly. Vol. 47, No1.
  110. Mrema, K. J. (2020). Piercing the Corporate Veil of Group Companies: A Critical Legal Analysis under the Companies Act of Tanzania. Retrieved from Repository.out.ac.tz. http://repository.out.ac.tz/2956/1/LATAMANI%20–18-FINAL%20SUBMISSION. pdf.
  111. Mьlbert, P. O. (2006). A synthetic view of different concepts of creditor protection. European Business Organization Law Review, pp. 123–125.
  112. Mьlhens, J. (2006). Der sogenannte Haftungsdurchgriff im deutschen und englischen Recht: Unterkapitalisierung und Vermцgensentzug. Tьbingen.
  113. Mьnch, K. (2010). Durchgriffshaftung im deutschen Konzernrecht. Zeitschrift fьr Wirtschaftsrecht (ZIP). Bd. 31, Nr. 10.
  114. Muсoz, D. R. (2010). The law of transnational securitization. Journal of Corporate Law Studies, 8(3). Routledge, pp. 5–6.
  115. Murphy, D. (1998). Holding company liability for debts of its subsidiaries: Corporate governance implications. Bond Law Review, 10, pp. 287–306.
  116. Nathan, R. S. (1986). Controlling the puppeteers: Reform of parent-subsidiary law in New Zealand. Canterbury Law Review, 3, pp. 1–12.
  117. Noack, U., Zцllner, W. (2018). Gesellschaftsrecht: Kommentar zum GmbH-Gesetz und den Vorschriften des Konzernrechts. Auflage. Mьnchen: Beck.
  118. Nwafor, A. O. (2015). Piercing of the Corporate Veil: An Incursion into the Judicial Conundrum. Corporate Board: Role, Duties, and Composition, 5–7. Retrieved from Semantic Scholar: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/903f/51ebe7ee2c606c79d671d e289d6b63734ad1.pdf.
  119. Oesterle, D. A. (1993). Piercing the Corporate Veil in American and European Law. Law and Contemporary Problems. Vol. 56, No4.
  120. Oetker, H., Haas, J. (2007). Die Haftung der Konzernmutter fьr Verbindlichkeiten der Tochtergesellschaft. Zeitschrift fьr Wirtschaftsrecht (ZIP). Bd. 28, Nr. 16.
  121. Oh, P. B. (2010). Veil-Piercing Unbound. Boston College Law Review. Vol. 55, No2. Ohlavlya, Y. O. (2017). Rehuliuvannia diialnosti transnatsionalnykh bankiv v umovakh hlobalnoi finansovoi nestabilnosti [Regulation of transnational banks’ activities in conditions of global financial instability] [PhD Dissertation Kyiv: KNEU Vadym Hetman], 45–68. https://kneu.edu.ua/userfiles/d-26.006.02/2017/Ogloblia_dis.pdf [in Ukrainian].
  122. Orn, P. (2009). Piercing the corporate veil: A law and economics analysis. University of Lund.
  123. Цrn, P. (2009). Piercing the corporate veil: A law and economics analysis. Lund University Publications
  124. Paech, P. (2019). Financial Regulation after the Crisis: Recovery or Revolution? Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 98–100.
  125. Pargendler, M. (2023). The New Corporate Law of Corporate Groups. European Corporate Governance Institute – Law Working Paper.
  126. Petrazhitsky, L. I. (1906). On the Spirit of Legality. Vestnik prava, No. 1. [in Russian].
  127. Petroševičienė, O. (2010). Effective protection of creditors’ interests in private companies. Social Studies Research Journal, 3(7), pp. 214–236.
  128. Phillips, D. A. (2013). A statistical analysis of corporate veil piercing. Review of Law and Economics, 9(2), pp. 37–64;
  129. Phiri, S. (2017). Piercing the Corporate Veil: A Critical Analysis of Section 20 (9) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008. Dissertation, University of Venda, pp. 18–20.
  130. Pistor, K. (2000). Patterns of legal change: shareholder and creditor rights in transition economies. European Business Organization Law Review (EBOR), pp. 112–115.
  131. Pistor, K., Keinan, Y., Kleinheisterkamp, J., & West, M. D. (2002). Evolution of Corporate Law: A Cross-Country Comparison. U. Pa. J. Int’l Econ. L., 23(4), pp. 12–14.
  132. Plessis, J. J., et al. (2022). Principles of Contemporary Corporate Governance. Cambridge University Press, pp. 211–213.
  133. Pohlmann, M. (2015). Unternehmensverantwortung und Haftung: Die Durchgriffshaftung im Recht der Kapitalgesellschaften. Heidelberg: Springer.
  134. Posner, R. (2011). Economic Analysis of Law (8th ed.). New York: Wolters Kluwer. Posner, R. A. (1976). The rights of creditors of affiliated corporations. University of Chicago Law Review, 43(3), pp. 499–541.
  135. Prentice, D. D. (1982). Groups of Companies: The English Experience. In Hopt, K., & Teubner, G. (Eds.), Corporate Groups in European Law. De Gruyter.
  136. Prentice, D. D. (1999). Some Aspects of the Law Relating to Corporate Groups in the
  137. United Kingdom. Connecticut Journal of International Law, 13, pp. 305–316. Prince, D. (2011). Corporate Liability for International Torts: Did the Second Circuit Misinterpret the Alien Tort Statute. Seton Hall Cir. Rev., 8, pp. 55–56.
  138. Pryguza, P. (2021). Conditions and grounds for bringing subsidiary liability in bankruptcy «Law enforcement and judicial practice in bankruptcy and insolvency procedures. Supreme Court, 04/23/2021. To the 30th anniversary of the establishment of commercial (arbitration) courts.». (https://supreme.court.gov.ua/userfiles/media/new_folder_for_uploads/supreme/Prez_Pryguza.pdf) [in Ukrainian].
  139. Qu, CZ & Ahl, B. (2008). The Oxford University Comparative Law Forum, p. 18–22.
  140. Academia.edu: https://www.academia.edu/download/101152736/74550_1.pdf Ramsay, I. M. (1998). Allocating liability in corporate groups: An Australian perspective. Connecticut Journal of International Law, 13, pp. 465–484.
  141. Rebmann, K., Mьller, A., & Schulze, R. (2004). Mьnchener Kommentar zum Bьrgerlichen Gesetzbuch. Band 5. Mьnchen: C. H. Beck.
  142. Reich-Graefe, R. (2005). Changing paradigms: The liability of corporate groups in Germany. Connecticut Law Review, 37(3), pp. 785–799.
  143. Reinhart, C. M., & Rogoff, K. S. (2009). This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly. Princeton University Press, pp. 217–219.
  144. Renner, M., & Kuntz, M. (2018). Konzernhaftung und deliktsrechtliche Durchgriffshaftung. Springer. Ringe, W. G. (2008). The deconstruction of equity: Subsidiary liability in European private law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 28(4), pp. 659–685;
  145. Robilant, A. D. (2006). Genealogies of Soft Law. The American Journal of Comparative Law. Ця праця розглядає еволюцію м’якого права та його юридичні корені, зокрема у корпоративному контексті. Oxford Academic: https://academic.oup.com/ajcl/ article-abstract/54/3/499/2571437.
  146. Rock, E., & Wachter, M. (2001). Dangerous Liaisons: Corporate Law, Trust Law, and Interdoctrinal Legal Transplants. Nw. UL Rev. Roth, W.-H., Kindler, P. (2014). Konzernrecht: Handbuch. Mьnchen: Beck. Ryngaert, C., & Jaarsma, M. (2024). ESG and international criminal liability. ElgarOnline. Sargent, N. C. (1987). Corporate groups and the corporate veil in Canada: A penetrating look at parent-subsidiary relations in the modern corporate enterprise. Manitoba Law Journal, 17, pp. 1–28.
  147. Schall, A. (2005). The UK Limited Company Abroad – How Foreign Creditors are Protected after Inspire Art. European Business Law Review, 16(6), 1023–1028. https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2005071 .
  148. Schall, A. (2011). Corporate Governance after the Death of the King the Origins of the Separation of Powers in Companies. European Corporate and Financial Law Review. Schall, C. (2005). Protecting Human Rights Through Corporate Accountability: The Emergence of a Business and Human Rights Regime in Europe. Virginia Journal of International Law, 46(4).
  149. Schiessl, M. (1986). The liability of corporations and shareholders for the capitalization and obligations of subsidiaries under German law. Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, 7(3), pp. 480–497.
  150. Schilling, M. (2006). The Development of a New Concept of Creditor Protection for German GmbHs. Zeitschrift fьr Wirtschaftsrecht, 27(11), 348.
  151. Schlehofer, M. (2017). Piercing the Corporate Veil: The German Experience. German Law Journal, pp. 50–53.
  152. Schley, D. P. (2020). Is Owning Stock an Abnormally Dangerous Activity? Shareholder Limited Liability in Tort. Chapman Law Review, 24, pp. 190–193.
  153. Schmidt, K., & Lutter, M. (2015). Haftung von Geschдftsfьhrern und Aufsichtsrдten in der AG und GmbH. Mьnchen: Beck.
  154. Schoenmaker, D. (2013). Governance of International Banking: The Financial Trilemma. Oxford University Press, pp. 59–62.
  155. Schulte, R. C. (1999). Groups of companies: The parent subsidiary relationship and creditors remedies. Durham University. Retrieved from Durham E-Theses: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/1465/1/1465.pdf.
  156. Schulz, M., & Wasmeier, O. (2012). The Law of Business Organizations: A Concise Overview of German Corporate Law.
  157. Sheehy, B. (2003). «The importance of corporate models: Economic and jurisprudential values and the future of corporate law.» DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal, 1(3), pp. 579–595.
  158. Shen, W., & Watters, C. (2014). Is China creating a new business order? Rationalizing China’s extraterritorial attempt to expand the veil-piercing doctrine. Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, 35(1), pp. 126–154.
  159. Słup, P. (2018). Piercing the Corporate Veil – A Common Pattern? Огляд за- стосування правових норм щодо «зняття корпоративного покрову» та Existenzvernichtungshaftung у європейській правовій системі. Comparative Law Review, 24(2), 83–90. CEJSH – Central European Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities: https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=803033.
  160. Smith, D. G. (2008). Piercing the corporate veil in regulated industries. Brigham Young University Law Review, 1165(4), pp. 1165–1200.
  161. Sommer, J. H. (1990). Subsidiary: Doctrine without a cause? Fordham Law Review, 59(2), pp. 230–260.
  162. Spiro, P. S. (2013). Clarifying the Rules for Piercing of the Corporate Veil. SSRN, 21– 23. SSRN: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2363647
  163. Steinberg, M. (2013). Corporate Law and Finance. New York: Aspen Publishers. Stetsyuk, P. A., Hudz, O. Ye., & Voitiuk, A. V. (2013). Transformation of the matrix of bank lending to agricultural enterprises. Ekonomika APKEconomics of Agro- Industrial Complex, 12, 58–65. Available at: http://www.irbis-nbuv.gov.ua/cgi-bin/ irbis_nbuv/cgiirbis_64.exe?C21COM=2&I21DBN=UJRN&P21DBN=UJRN &IMAGE_FILE_DOWNLOAD=1&Image_file_name=PDF/E_apk_2013_12_10.pdf [in Ukrainian].
  164. Stevens, R. (2016). Liability within company groups. Journal of South African Law, 4, pp. 209–228.
  165. Strohn, L. (2015). Die Haftung des faktischen Geschдftsfьhrers. Neue Zeitschrift fьr Gesellschaftsrecht (NZG). Bd. 18, Nr. 7.
  166. Stubbs, L. (2016). Undercapitalization as an independent ground for shareholder liability. Dalhousie University Halifax.
  167. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia (1986-12-16) Decision No. 16965 : https://opencasebook.org/documents/8349.
  168. Sweeney, M. A. (2009). Piercing the Corporate Veil in Ohio: The Need for a New Standard following Dombroski v. Wellpoint, Inc. Cleveland State Law Review, 57. Taleb, N. N. (2007). The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. Random House.
  169. Tchanturia, L. (2016). Piercing liability of shareholders for tax infringements: An attempt to implement piercing the corporate veil in judicial law. In Todua N. (Ed.), Guram Natchkebia – 75. Tbilisi: Georgian Judicial Practice.
  170. Thompson, R. (1991); Piercing the corporate veil: An empirical study. Cornell Law Review, 76(5), pp. 1036–1074;
  171. Thompson, R. B., & Thomas, R. S. (2004). The new look of shareholder litigation:Acquisition-oriented class actions. Vanderbilt Law Review, 57(5), pp. 133–197.
  172. Tillmann, T. (2004). Shareholder Liability for Undercapitalization: From a Shareholder Responsibility and Creditor Protection Perspective. University of Toronto Press, pp. 123–126.
  173. Tricker, B. (2020). The Evolution of Corporate Governance. Cambridge University Press.
  174. Trцger, T. H. (2005). Choice of Jurisdiction in European Corporate Law – Perspectives of European Corporate Governance. European Business Organization Law Review (EBOR), pp. 22–23.
  175. Troian, M. Y., & Shkola, V. Y. (2021). Guidelines on Corporate Governance and Auditing: International Standards.
  176. Ulmer, P. (2004). Die Haftung von Gesellschaftern und Geschдftsfьhrern in der GmbH. Zeitschrift fьr Unternehmens- und Gesellschaftsrecht, 33(5), 710–735.
  177. Urnaa, B. (2022). An exploration into liability of corporate groups: A comparative perspective. University of Pйcs. Pйcs University Library.
  178. Van Beers, B. (2017). The Changing Nature of Law’s Natural Person: The Impact of Emerging Technologies on the Legal Concept of the Person. German Law Journal. Retrieved from Cambridge: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law- journal/article/changing-nature-of-laws-natural-person-the-impact-of-emerging- technologies-on-the-legal-concept-of-the-person/DCAC68DAB634D1112EA4179 53D1CBC98.
  179. Van der Weide, M. E. (1996). Against fiduciary duties to corporate stakeholders. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law, 21.
  180. Vandekerckhove, K. (2007). Piercing the Corporate Veil: A Transnational Approach. – Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.
  181. Velasquez, M. G. (1983). Why corporations are not morally responsible for anything they do. Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 2(3), pp. 5–7. Available on JSTOR: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27799793.
  182. Vriesendorp, R. D. (2005). Ethics and the Law of Corporate Responsibility. European Company and Financial Law Review, pp. 28–30.
  183. Walsh, C. (2023). Key indicators for management. 100+ financial factors for effective company management / trans. from English: Yaroslav Vitashlyuk. Kyiv, Nash format [in Ukrainian].
  184. Wattad, M. S. A. (2016). Natural persons, legal entities, and corporate criminal liability under the Rome statute. UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs, 20, 95–97. Retrieved from JSTOR: https://www.jstor.org/stable/45302257.
  185. Wimmer-Leonhardt, S. (2004). Konzernhaftungsrecht: die Haftung der Konzernmuttergesellschaft fьr die Tochtergesellschaften im deutschen und englischen Recht. Wooldridge, F. (2005). Controlling Shareholders’ Liability in German Private Companies. Comparative Law, 26(9), 286–290.
  186. Kafedra ekonomichnoi kiberbezpeky (2019). Modern information technologies in socio- economic systems. Sumy State University, 54–59. Retrieved from: https:// essuir.sumdu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/79147/1/Yarovenko_1546.pdf [in Ukrainian].
  187. Yazici, A. H. (2014). Lifting the corporate veil in group of companies: Would the single economic unit doctrine of EU competition law set a precedent? Law & Justice Review, 5, pp. 175–192.
  188. Zavalko, T. (2020). The Corporate Veil in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights. Mykolas Romeris University.
  189. Zhen Qu, C., & Ahl, B. (2007). Lowering the corporate veil in Germany: A case note on BGH (Trihotel). Oxford U Comparative Law Forum, 4.
  190. Zцllner, W. (2006). Glдubigerschutz durch Gesellschafterhaftung bei der GmbH. В B. Dauner-Lieb et al. Festschrift fьr Horst Konzen (.pp 999–1003). Mohr Siebeck.
© Цивілістична платформа. Всі права захищено. 2025