«PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL» THROUCH THE MECHANISM OF BRINING TO THE SUBSIDIARY RESPONSIBILITY IN CASE OF BANCRUPTSY

T.A. Spirina

Perm State National Research University
15, Bukirev st., Perm, 614990
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Abstract: The article describes the possibilities for application in the existing Russian realities of widespread in common law doctrine of "piercing the corporate veil" which is based on current legislation, in particular, on the Federal Law of the Russian Federation dated 26.10.2002 №127-FZ "On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)".

The mentioned doctrine is actively discussed in business circles in connection with the reform of civil law in the area of corporate law. Until now, in our country there is a tremendous amount of abuse of the legal entity structure for illegal purposes. It seems obvious that it is necessary to develop effective mechanisms to deal with such offenses.

Foreign experience shows that the use of the concept of "piercing the corporate veil" can be quite an effective tool to counter asset retirement and other unscrupulous activities of legal entities.

In the Russian judicial practice cases of “piercing the corporate veil” are constantly increasing, especially after direct mentioning of this doctrine by Supreme Arbitration Court in the case of Latvian bank "Parex". But still there remain many unresolved issues, in particular, regarding the terms of the circumstances which need to be proved in court, the burden of proof and some others.

Since the most frequently mentioned issues arise under the bankruptcy proceedings, it is necessary to analyze the rules of art. 10 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation dated 26.10.2002 №127-FZ "On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)" which in fact is one of the mechanisms for “lifting corporate veil" in Russian legislation.

The author analyzes the subject composition held, liable persons, range of circumstances which need to be proved in court, as there exist legislative gaps and contradictions that prevent the use of Russian in this legal doctrine.

The conclusion is made that it is highly necessary to develop the more detailed law relating to exclusions to the principle of the limitation of liability of the legal entity of participants in order to avoid undue invasion of the independence of the legal entities.

Keywords: subsidiary liability; bancruptsy; legal entity; piercing of “corporate veil”; mechanism of piercing the “corporate veil” in Russia

References

1. Budylin S.L., Ivanec Ju.L. Sryvaja pokrovy. Doktrina snjatija korporativnoj vuali v zarubezhnyh stranah i v Rossii // Vestnik Vysshego Arbitr. Suda Ros. Federacii. 2013. №7. S. 80–125.

2. Grazhdanskij kodeks Rossijskoj Federacii. Сhast' pervaja ot 30 nojab. 1994 г.№51-FZ (red. ot 02.07.2013) // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva Ros. Federacii. 1994. №32, st. 3301.

3. Karnakov Ja.V. «Snjatie korporativnoj vuali» v proekte Koncepcii razvitija zakonodatel'stva o juridicheskih licah // Ros. pravo: obrazovanie, praktika, nauka. 2009. №9(62). S. 31–36.

4. Ob akcionernyh obshhestvah: Feder. zakon Ros. Federacii ot 26 dek. 1995 g. №208-FZ (red ot. 05.04.2013) // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva Ros. Federacii. 1996. №1, st. 1.

5. Ob obshhestvah s ogranichennoj otvetstvennost'ju: Feder. zakon Ros. Federacii ot 8 fevr. 1998 g. №14-FZ (red ot. 29.12.2012) // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva Ros. Federacii. 1998. №7, st. 785.

6. O nesostojatel'nosti (bankrotstve): Feder. zakon Ros. Federacii ot 26 okt. 2002 g. №127-FZ (red ot 28.06.2013) // Sobr. zakonodatel'stva RF. 2002. №43, st. 4190.

7. Opredelenie VAS RF ot 29.04.2013 g. №VAS-11134/12 po delu №A60-1260/09.

8. Postanovlenie Prezidiuma VAS RF ot 24.04.2012 №16404/11 po delu №A40-21127/11-98-184 // Vestnik VAS RF. 2012. №10.

9. Postanovlenie Prezidiuma VAS RF ot 07.06.2012 №9127/12 po delu №A40-82872/10-73-400«B» // Vestnik VAS RF. 2013. №2.

10. Postanovlenie Prezidiuma VAS RF ot 06.11.2012 №9127/12 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tantPljus».

11. Postanovlenie FAS Vostochno-Sibirskogo okruga ot 24.05.2011 po delu №A19-18170/09 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tantPljus».

12. Postanovlenie FAS Dal'nevostochnogo okruga ot 08.06.2012 №F03-1956/2012 po delu №A51-18145/2011 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tantPljus».

13. Postanovlenie FAS Moskovskogo okruga ot 18.02.2013 po delu №A40-61071/11-103-6b [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tantPljus».

14. Postanovlenie FAS Ural'skogo okruga ot 23.05.2007 po delu №F09-8094/06-S4 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tantPljus».

15. Postanovlenie FAS Ural'skogo okruga ot 24.02.2011 №F09-471/11-S4 po delu №A50-10372/2010 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tantPljus».

16. Postanovlenie FAS Ural'skogo okruga ot 28.01.2013 №F09-13297/12 po delu №A50-8307/2009 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tantPljus».

17. Postanovlenie FAS Ural'skogo okruga ot 26.06.2013 №F09-5029/13 po delu №A07-23329/2011 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tantPljus».

18. Postanovlenie FAS Central'nogo okruga ot 16.03.2012 po delu №A64-5234/09 [Jelektronnyj resurs]. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoj sistemy «Konsul'tant_Pljus».

19. Behind the Corporate Veil: using corporate entities for illicit purposes. OECD’s report. Paris: OECD, 2001. P. 3.

20. Griggs L., Lugten G., 2007. Veil over the nets unravelling corporate liability for IUU fishing offences. Marine Policy, 31(2): 159–168.

21. Paul L.Criswell, 2005. Veil Piercing, Some Practical Guidelines. The Independent Counsel, 12(10): 93.

22. Wormser I. Maurice, 1912. Piercing the veil of corporate entity. Columbia Law Review, 12(6): 496–518.