20 years together

June 2014

30 June 2014

Dimitrov, Petrov & Co. successfully defended the interests of a major supplier of ground handling services in a complex case before the Commission for Protection of Competition (CPC) related to an alleged abuse of dominance in the form of predatory pricing.  After taking up the defence of the client, our competition team, headed by Zoya Todorova, managed to lead the case to a turn for the better as the CPC returned it for additional investigation due to justified doubts in its initial assessment. The favourable decision for our client that was pronounced by the CPC in June 2014 is currently being appealed before the Supreme Administrative Court.

***

On June 13-14, 2014 Mr. Metodi Baykushev, Partner at Dimitrov, Petrov & Co. Law Firm, took part in the Young Arbitrator’s Forum organized by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and held in Rome, Italy. Mr. Baykushev was an active participant in interactive debates on topical issues in international arbitration. The Forum provides young arbitration practitioners diverse opportunities to network and to exchange experience with peers from the whole of Europe.

***

Interpretative Decision No. 4 of June 18, 2014 by the Supreme Court of Cassation

The General Assembly of the Civil and the Commercial Colleges of the Supreme Court of Cassation (GACCC of SCC) has adopted an interpretative decision on some disputable issues related to the payment order procedure under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).
 
With regard to the issues raised, GACCC of SCC has adopted the following:
 
1.  In case of established irregularity of the application under Art. 410, Para. 2 of CPC, in compliance with the requirements under Art. 127, Para. 1 and 3, and Art. 128, item 1 of CPC, the court issuing the order shall not be obliged to give instructions to the applicant for its rectification, but it shall reject the application. Giving instructions to the applicant is mandatory only in the explicitly provided hypothesis in Art. 425, Para. 2 of CPC, as well as in case the state fee for the application is not paid in full. 

2.a. An application for issuance of an order for partial payment of a receivable exceeding 25,000 BGN meets the requirements under Art. 410, Para. 1, item 1 of CPC.

2.b. An application for issuance of a payment order under Art. 410 of CPC does not meet the requirements under Art. 410, Para. 2, in connection to Art. 127, Para. 1, item 4 of CPC, where the application does not specify in detail the circumstances from which the receivable arises, but these can be inferred from the documents enclosed to the application.

An application for issuance of an order for immediate payment under Art. 417 of CPC meets the requirements under Art. 410, Para 2, in connection to Art. 127, Para. 1, item 4 of CPC, where the application does not specify in detail the circumstances from which the receivable arises, but these can be inferred from the document enclosed to the application under Art. 417 of CPC.

3.a. Where upon serving the order the court issuing the order establishes that the latter has been issued against a debtor with a permanent address or head office in another court’s district, there are no grounds for nullifying the order or for referring the case to the relevant court, as once the order has been issued, the issue of the local jurisdiction may not be reconsidered. 

3.b. In the absence of the prerequisite stipulated in Art. 411, Para. 2, item 3 of CPC, the order shall be nullified by the court issuing the order, and by the appellant court - only if the order is duly served and is confirmed with the expiry of the term for objection. In the absence of the prerequisite under Art. 411, Para. 2, item 4 of CPC, the order may be nullified only by the appellate court, but not by the court issuing the order.

4.a. There are grounds for issuance of an order for immediate payment under Art. 417 of CPC and for accessory receivables for compensation of the damages from non-payment of the main receivable, where they have been grounded and determined or determinable as amount in the very document under Art. 417 of CPC. An order for immediate payment may not be issued for the statutory interest on the receivable for the period from the due date to the filing of the application. 

There are no grounds for issuance of a payment order under Art. 417, items 2 and 3 of CPC for receivables based on the exercised right to rescind a contract.

There are grounds for issuance of an order for immediate payment under Art. 417 of CPC for the statutory interest on the receivable demanded by the applicant for the period after the filing of the application for issuance of an order for immediate payment.

4.b. There are no grounds for issuance of an order for immediate payment under Art. 417 of CPC against the warrantor, if judging by the documents enclosed to the application, the court establishes that at the date of its filing, the term under Art. 147, Para. 1 of the Obligations and Contracts Act (OCA) has expired.

4.c. An order for immediate payment under Art. 417, item 5 of CPC may be issued if the applicant has provided: the respective sale agreement with keeping the title until payment of the price or a leasing agreement; an excerpt from the special pledges register regarding registered circumstances related to the contract; an official document or a private document prepared by the debtor within the meaning of Art. 418, Para. 3 of CPC – where judging by the contract provided or the excerpt from the special pledges register, the receivable for giving back a leased object or a sold object with keeping the title is exigible or not, depending on another circumstance (including termination or rescission of the contract due to default by the debtor). 

4.d. There are grounds for issuance of an order for immediate payment under an application from or against a universal successor of the creditor, respectively debtor, specified in the document under Art. 417 of CPC.  

There are grounds for issuance of an order for immediate payment in favour of the private successor of the creditor specified in the document under Art. 417 of CPC, where the fact of succession is established by the very document. If a separate document under Art. 417 of CPC for the private succession is available, the latter is the grounds for issuance of an order for immediate payment in favour of the successor, if the transferred receivable is specified therein.

Where the private succession is based on a transfer agreement, the transfer of the receivable should be announced to the debtor. 

Where the payment grounds under Art. 417, item 2 of CPC is issued with a view to a special capacity of the creditor, for the issuance of an order for immediate payment in favour of its private successor the latter should have the same capacity as well.

An order for immediate payment against the private successor of the debtor specified in the document under Art. 417 of CPC may be issued where a separate document under Art. 417 of CPC for the private succession is available, being individual grounds for issuance of the order, if the transferred receivable is specified therein.

4.e. Issuance of an order for immediate payment under Art. 417, item 9 of CPC is not allowed where the promissory note contains a supplement regarding the presence of contractual relations, but only if the supplement denies the unconditional nature of the assumed obligation. If the supplement indicating the contractual relations does not affect the requisites of the bill of exchange, the supplement shall be considered unwritten and not vitiating its form.

5.a. The court shall ex officio supervise the observance of the preclusive term under Art. 414, Para. 2, in connection to Art. 418, Para. 5 of CPC, and therefore the debtor shall provide evidence of the observance of the term. If such evidence is not provided with the objection, the court shall give instructions to the debtor to present it or shall demand such data from the bailiff.

The judgement of the court issuing the order that the objection against the order for immediate payment has been filed after the term under Art. 414, Para. 2, in connection to Art. 418, Para. 5 of CPC, shall be objectified in a ruling for its turning down. This court act is subject to appeal with a private appeal by the debtor, as it obstructs the course of the proceedings within the meaning of Art. 274, Para. 1, item 1 of CPC. In the hypothesis under Art. 410 of CPC there is no legal interest from the individual protection against such judgment of the court issuing the order, as the protection of the debtor is realised pursuant to Art. 407 of CPC.

5.b. After an objection according to an affirmed sample is filed, the court shall be obliged to apply the consequences of Art. 415 of CPC, even if the objections declared by the debtor are unclear in the part concerning the challenged grounds or the amount of the receivables for which the payment order has been issued.  

5.c. The prerequisites for entry into force of the order with respect to the main debtor and warrantor shall be individually considered. The court issuing the order shall give instructions pursuant to Art. 415 of CPC for filing a claim for establishment of the receivable only with regard to the debtor that has filed the objection. With respect to the debtor that has not filed an objection, the order shall enter into force. 

5.d. Where the ruling for immediate payment is revoked, and there is a pending procedure under Art. 422 of CPC arising from an objection filed by the debtor under Art. 414 of CPC, the court shall not issue a reverse writ of execution in favour of the debtor pursuant to Art. 245, Para. 3, sentence 2 of CPC.  

Where the court has issued a writ of execution based on the judgement that the payment order under Art. 410 of CPC has entered into force, but the debtor claims to have filed an objection against the same order within the term under Art. 414, Para. 2 of CPC, the debtor shall be protected pursuant to Art. 407 of CPC – by appeal of the ruling for issuance of a writ of execution. Where the debtor claims that the debtor has not been able to file an objection against the order because the order has not been duly served, the protection procedure specified under Art. 423 of CPC shall apply.

The provision under Art. 248 of CPC shall apply in the order procedure in the hypothesis in which the court issuing the order has not ruled on the expenditures claim. The provisions under Art. 247, Art. 250 and Art. 251 of CPC shall apply in the order proceedings.      

The appellate rulings within the order procedure are not subject to cassation.

In the procedure under Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC, the receivable under a payment order shall be established upon completion of the stage of collecting evidence in the claim proceedings. In such proceedings the provision under Art. 235, Para. 3 of CPC shall apply with respect to the facts arising after the submission of the application for issuance of a payment order, except for the fact of satisfying the receivable by enforcing collection of the amounts under the writ of execution issued on the basis of the ruling for immediate payment within the initiated execution procedure. 

10.a. The procedural prerequisites for the existence and the proper exercise of the right to claim to be filed pursuant to Art. 422, respectively 415, Para. 1 of CPC are not present in the cases where the objection under Art. 414 of CPC has not been filed in the term under Art. 414, Para. 2 of CPC or it does not challenge the receivable. The court examining the claim under Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC shall judge at its discretion on the presence of these special procedural prerequisites and shall not be bound by what has been established in this respect by the court in the order procedure. 

10.b. The procedural prerequisites for the existence and proper exercise of the right to claim to be filed pursuant to Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC are present in the cases of universal or private succession with the applicant or the debtor occurring after the issuance of the payment order.
 
In case of universal succession occurring in the period between the issuance of the payment order and the filing of the claim, the successors participate in the litigation on the grounds of Art. 227 of CPC.

In case of private succession upon transferring the receivable by way of a transfer agreement, occurring in the period after the issuance of the payment order until the filing of the claim pursuant to Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC, it is the transferor that is legitimate to participate in the proceedings of the claim of ascertainment, and the provision under Art. 226 of CPC shall apply. The transferee is also legitimate to file the claim if the transferee has observed the term under Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC.

10. c. The procedural prerequisites for the existence and the proper exercise of the right to claim to be filed pursuant to Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC, are not present in the cases where the claim is filed for establishment of the receivable for the expenditures incurred in the order procedure.
 
11.a. In the proceedings for the claim filed pursuant to Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC, it is admissible to examine the objections to the creditor’s receivable justified in the debtor’s objection under Art. 414, Para. 1 of CPC, even if the defendant has not filed a reply to the statement of claim or has not made such objections within the term for reply.  

11.b. In the proceedings for the claim filed pursuant to Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC, it is possible to admit for joint consideration, as follows: another claim by the defendant – Art. 210, Para. 1 of CPC, an opposable claim – Art. 211 of CPC, a step in the main proceedings – Art. 212 of CPC, subject to the conditions for their adoption for joint consideration with the claim under Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC. 

11.c. In the proceedings for the claim filed pursuant to Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC, it is admissible to make objections for payment and deduction.

11.d. In the proceedings for the claim filed pursuant to Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC, it is admissible to take into consideration the address of the party specified in the order procedure, but for applying the consequences under Art. 40 and Art. 41 of CPC the party should have been notified by the court.

The court considering the claim that is filed pursuant to Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC shall rule on the payability of the expenditures incurred in the order procedure as well, and depending on the outcome of the dispute, the court shall distribute the liability for the expenditures both in the claim proceedings and the order procedure.

The issued execution order and the writ of execution shall not be subject to nullification in case of rejection of the claim filed pursuant to Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC.

The issued execution order and the writ of execution are subject to nullification upon termination of the proceedings for the claim filed pursuant to Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC, except for cases of termination of the court proceedings by a court settlement or if the court of claim acknowledges that the execution order has entered into effect.

It is the court in the claim proceedings which has issued the ruling for termination that is competent to nullify the payment order issued under Art. 410, respectively under Art. 417 of CPC, and nullify the writ of execution under Art. 418 of CPC upon termination of the proceedings for the claim filed pursuant to Art. 415, Para. 1, respectively Art. 422 of CPC. 

In case of full or partial rejection of the claim filed pursuant to Art. 422 of CPC, on account of non-occurrence of the receivable; nullity of the grounds for the receivable, or due to discharge of the receivable by prescription, a reverse writ of execution is issued to the defendant pursuant to Art. 245, Para. 3, sentence 2 of CPC for the amount, subject of the rejected part of the claim, but only if the claimant has received amounts to the claimant’s satisfaction through compulsory collection of the receivable under the issued writ of execution, based on the ruling for immediate payment within the initiated execution procedure, up to the sum of these amounts.   
 
In case of full or partial rejection of the claim filed pursuant to Art. 422 of CPC, due to voluntary payment of the receivable through payment, deduction, giving instead of payment or in another repayment method beyond the execution procedure, based on the facts taken into account pursuant to Art. 235, Para. 3 of CPC, a reverse writ of execution is issued to the defendant pursuant to Art. 245, Para. 3, sentence 2 of CPC for the amount, subject of the rejected part of the claim, but only if the claimant has received amounts to the claimant’s satisfaction through compulsory collection of the receivable under the issued writ of execution, based on the ruling for immediate payment within the initiated execution procedure, and up to the amount of double payment. Double payment is available where the sum of the amount received by the creditor through the compulsory collection of the receivable within the initiated execution procedure, and the amount voluntarily paid by the debtor beyond the initiated execution procedure, exceeds the amount of the receivable, subject of the payment order.

It is the court in the claim procedure that is competent to issue a reverse writ of execution pursuant to Art. 245, Para. 3, sentence 2 of CPC, in case of rejection of the claim filed pursuant to Art. 422 of CPC.

In case of termination of the proceedings for the claim filed pursuant to Art. 422 of CPC (apart from the cases of termination of the proceedings with an affirmed court settlement, as well as except for the hypothesis where the court acknowledges that the payment order has entered into effect), a reverse writ of execution is issued to the defendant pursuant to Art. 245, Para. 3, sentence 2 of CPC, if the claimant has received amounts to the claimant’s satisfaction through compulsory collection of the receivable under the issued writ of execution, based on the ruling for immediate payment within the initiated execution procedure, up to the sum of these amounts.

It is the court in the claim procedure which has issued the ruling for termination that is competent to issue a reverse writ of execution pursuant to Art. 245, Para. 3, sentence 2 of CPC, in case of termination of the proceedings for the claim filed pursuant to Art. 422 of CPC.

The provision of Art. 241 of CPC shall not apply in the order procedure. The court that has considered and sustained the claim under Art. 422, respectively Art. 415, Para. 1 of CPC is competent to rule on a claim for deferring or rescheduling of a receivable established by the court.

The state fee for the objection under Art. 423 of CPC is at the amount specified in Art. 16 of the Tariff of State Fees which are collected by the courts under CPC.

The judgement on whether in the statement of claim under Art. 424 of CPC newly established circumstances or new written evidence are stated, giving grounds for re-considering the issue of payability of the receivable, determines the admissibility of the claim, but not its grounds.

In case of a claim of ascertainment filed pursuant to Art. 422, Para. 1 of CPC in the hypothesis of a payment order issued under Art. 417, item 9 of CPC, subject of the litigation is the existence of the receivable based on the promissory note.

In case of statements or objections by the parties, based on particular contractual relations on the basis of or with regard to which the promissory note has been issued, the contractual relations are also subject to examination.

In the proceedings for the claim of ascertainment filed pursuant to Art. 422, Para. 1 of CPC, the claimant-creditor shall prove its receivable based on the bill of exchange – the existence of a promissory note in the legitimate form, subject to payment. In case of statements or objections based in particular contractual relations on the basis of or with regard to which the promissory note has been issued, each of the parties shall prove the facts on which the statements and objections are based and which are determining for the claimed right, or respectively the denied right – for the existence, or respectively non-existence of the receivable under the promissory note.  

18. In the hypothesis of a claim filed under Art. 422, Para. 1 of CPC for a receivable arising from a bank loan agreement with the stipulation that the whole credit shall become early due and payable in case of non-payment of certain number of instalments or in other circumstances, and the creditor may collect its receivable, without notifying the debtor, the receivable becomes due upon non-payment or occurrence of circumstances, after the bank has exercised its right to make the credit early due and payable, and has announced it to the debtor.

In the hypothesis of a claim filed under Art. 422, Para. 1 of CPC, the receivable arising from a bank loan agreement becomes due and payable if the creditor has exercised its right to make the credit early due and payable. If the early payability is stipulated in the contract subject to specific circumstances or is announced pursuant to Art. 60, Para. 2 of the Credit Institutions Act, the right of the creditor should have been exercised before the filing of the application for issuance of a payment order, and the creditor should have notified the debtor of the announcement of the early payability of the credit.

The decision has been signed with dissenting opinion by some of the judges.

***

Decision No. 238 of May 22, 2014 of the Communications Regulation Commission for amendment and supplement of the Rules for provision of electronic communications through radio equipment using radio frequency spectrum which does not need to be individually assigned

This Decision was promulgated in the State Gazette, issue 47 of June 6, 2014.

By Decision No. 238 of May 22, 2014 the Communications Regulation Commission (CRC) introduces some amendments in the Rules for provision of electronic communications through radio equipment using radio frequency spectrum which does not need to be individually assigned (the Rules). These amendments are implemented into the Rules to ensure harmonisation of the Rules with a number of Decisions and Recommendations of the European Commission (Decisions 2005/513/EC, 2007/90/EC, 2008/294/EC, 2008/671/EC, 2010/166/EU, and Recommendations 2008/295/EC, 2010/167/EU).

Most of the amendments and supplements incorporate explanations of terms and procedures concerning the types of electronic communications devices. The new Art. 12 exhaustively lists the types of short range equipment defined in Art. 11, Para. 1, item 2, according to their application.

A new Art. 17 is created, which regulates the implementation of electronic communications through Earth Stations On Mobile Platforms (ESOMPs) installed on board aircraft and vessels registered under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Bulgaria. Their usage is subject to preliminary authorisation by the Minister of Transport, Information Technology and Communications or by an authorised person, for installation and operation of the necessary equipment on board the respective aircraft or vessel. It is established that all electronic communications networks from Earth Stations On Mobile Platforms (ESOMPs) shall be used in accordance with the technical requirements for provision of electronic communications. It is also established that no notification shall be submitted to CRC for electronic communications provided through electronic communications networks from ESOMPs installed on board aircraft flying over the territory of the Republic of Bulgarian, or respectively, installed on board vessels floating in the territorial waters of the Republic of Bulgarian, and which are registered in another country, provided that usage of radio frequency from Earth Stations On Mobile Platforms  installed on the respective means of transportation is authorised by the country under whose jurisdiction they have been registered.

Definitions of the terms “short range devices” and “ESOMPs (Earth Stations On Mobile Platforms)” are provided in the Additional Provisions. The Appendix to Art. 11, Para. 3 is amended in accordance with the new European requirements.

This Decision enters into force on June 6, 2014.

***

Act for Amendment and Supplement to the Cadastre and Property Register Act (AASCPRA)

AASCPRA was promulgated in State Gazette, issue 49 of June 6, 2014.

A main amendment, which is introduced in the AASCPRA, concerns the Unified System of Civil Registration and Administrative Services of the Population (USCRASP), where Art. 7, paragraph 2 the abbreviation USCRASP is replaced with “Population register – National Database “Population”, Commercial register and”. A new paragraph is created in this article as well, whose content is related to the exchange of data between the information systems and the national database “Population”, which is done free of charge.

A second sentence is added in Art. 8, paragraph 1, which states that the cadastral map and cadastral registers are property of the state.

A new Art. 31a is created in Chapter Three, which states that the cadastre contains information regarding areas of restriction on land plots ensuing from servitude or restriction, which in turn arises on the basis of an enactment, an administrative act or a contract.  A register for these areas is kept and the data related to them is submitted to the Agency of Geodesy, Cartography and Cadastre. The data related to zone restrictions is described via metadata structures that also contain data for their accuracy, thoroughness and up-to-dateness.

Art. 32, paragraphs 4 to 8 introduce a regulation of the “specialized maps and registers”. The latter are adopted by a commission. A copy in digital form of the adopted specialized maps and registers shall be submitted to the Agency of Geodesy, Cartography and Cadastre, as well as to the municipal administration. According to paragraph 8 the changes made on the cadastral map under Art. 51 shall be updated in the specialized maps.

Amendments are made in Art. 51 as well, which states that the cadastral map and cadastral registers shall be amended in the event of establishing changes in the data for the objects or in the event of presence of gaps and errors. A draft in digital and graphical form shall be prepared in order for such amendments to take place.

Art. 53 is also amended – the amendments in the cadastral register of real estates are made in case of new or changed data, in case the grounds for registration are no longer valid or in case of discrepancy between the data in the real estate cadastral register and the source verifying the data.

In this respect, Art. 54 is amended as well, under which the gaps or errors are  supplemented or corrected by the offices of Geodesy, Cartography and Cadastre on the grounds of written evidence and a draft for amendment of the cadastral map and the real estate cadastral registers. Art. 2 introduces an innovation – when the gap or error concerns a dispute for material right it shall be reflected in a combined plan.

A new art. 54a is created in Chapter Six, which concerns the draft plan. The owner of the real estate shall provide such a draft plan for the purpose of defining the boundaries to the Office of Geodesy, Cartography and Cadastre. The owner is also obliged to provide the Office data of the constructed buildings and buildings with superstructures.

When an administrative act or judicial decision revokes an already made amendment in the cadastral map and the real estate cadastral registers, the Office of Geodesy, Cartography and Cadastre restores the data in the cadastral maps and cadastral registers in the condition before the amendment, stipulates the new Art. 54b.

Paragraph 1 of the Additional provisions gives a definition to the newly entered concept of combined plan. A combined plan is a plan, which contains the joint data from two or more sources: cadastral map, cadastral plans, regulatory plans, zoning plans, geodesic surveys, specialized maps, restricted areas, maps and plans, approved under the Agricultural Land Ownership and Use Act and the Restoration of Ownership of Forests and Forestry Fund Lands Act.

***

Ordinance for Amendment and Supplement to Ordinance No. 1 of 2007 for Keeping, Storage and Access to the Commercial Register (OASOKSACR)

OASOKSACR is issued by the Ministry of Justice and promulgated in State Gazette, issue 53 of June 27, 2014

The main amendment in Ordinance No. 1 of 2007 is the revocation of all provisions pertaining to submission of an application for entry of circumstances regarding a company and regulating the requirement of entry into the Commercial Register of a notarised declaration under Art. 6, Para. 2 in connection with Art. 4 of the Economic and Financial Relations with Companies Registered in Jurisdictions with Preferential Tax Regime, their Related Persons and their Actual Owners Act (EFRCRJPTRRPAOA, promulgated in the State Gazette, issue 1 of January 3, 2014), and a document proving the existence of a company registered in jurisdiction with preferential tax regime, and certifying the persons who represent it under its national law. These provisions are replaced by two new sections IXf and XVIa. In addition, two new appendixes are created for an application form – Appendix No. A14 and Appendix No. B7.

The new Section IXf – “Application for entry of circumstances regarding a company registered in jurisdiction with preferential tax regime” comprises a single article - Art. 33o. It stipulates that circumstances regarding a company registered in jurisdiction with preferential tax regime under Art. 6, Para. 1, item 1 of EFRCRJPTRRPAOA, which are subject to entry in the Commercial Register, should be specified in an application form under Appendix No. A14.

The new section XVIa – “Application for entry of circumstances regarding the actual owners of companies registered in jurisdictions with preferential tax regime” comprises only Article 50a. According to Art. 50a, circumstances under Art. 4 of EFRCRJPTRRPAOA, as well as identifying data of the actual owners – individuals, which are subject to entry in the Commercial Register, should be specified in an application form under Appendix No. B7.

To each of the aforesaid application forms the following documents should be enclosed: a document proving the existence of the company registered in a jurisdiction with preferential tax regime and certifying the persons who represent it under its national law; a notarised declaration under Art. 6, Para. 2 of EFRCRJPTRRPAOA; other documents required by law.

Amendments are made in Art. 63a. When filing the application form under Appendix No. E1, the Uniform Identification Code and the company name should be specified, and in the place for “Reason” one of the five reasons in the provision concerning the establishment of a company or changing its head office should be stated.

The procedure for entry and liquidation of a merchant not re-registered under § 5a of the Transitional and Final Provisions of the Commercial Register Act (promulgated in the State Gazette, issue 34 of April 25, 2006, last suppl. in the State Gazette, issue 40 of May 13, 2014), regulated under § 2b of the Transitional and Final Provisions of Ordinance No. 1 of 2007 is also amended and expanded. The provisions concerning appointing liquidators, their activity and fees, as well as the deadline of the liquidation are further developed.

According to the new Para. 10 and Para. 11 of § 2b, the registration official determines the liquidator’s fee, considering and estimating the work completed, the time and expenses needed for completing the liquidation, and other circumstances in connection with the liquidation. These circumstances are certified with a declaration filed by the liquidator. For that purpose a new declaration form is created with OASOKSACR - Appendix No. 2 of § 2b, Para. 11 of the Transitional and Final Provisions of Ordinance No. 1 of 2007 for Keeping, Storage and Access to the Commercial Register for estimation and payment of a liquidator’s fee.

OASOKSACR enters into force on the day of its promulgation in the State Gazette.

***

« Previous  Next »