Противоречие в определении национальность юридического лица: о критериях инкорпорации и оседлости

Аннотация

Калит сўзлар: Ушбу мақолада юридик шахснинг миллати ва шахсий Шахсий қонун қонунини аниқловчи мезонлар тадқиқ қилинган: реал ўтроқлик инкорпорация мезони ва ўтроқлик мезони. Инкорпорация формал ўтроқлик ва ўтроқлик мезонларининг камчиликлари ва бошқарувчи орган Barcelona Traction ELSI афзалликлари қиёсий таҳлил орқали ўрганилди. Шунингдек, мақолада суд амалиёти, олимларниг илмий қарашлари ва норматив-ҳуқуқий ҳужжатлар асосида инкорпорация ва ўтроқлик мезонлари ўртасидаги зиддият муҳокама қилинди. 1 University of World Economy and Diplomacy, Tashkent, Uzbekistan email: mustread707@gmail.com Жамият ва инновациялар – Общество и инновации – Society and innovations Special issue -1, №01 (2020) / ISSN 2181-1415 Противоречие в определении национальности юридического лица: о критериях инкорпорации и оседлости АННОТАЦИЯ Ключевые слова: В статье рассмотрены критерии, используемые для Личный закон определения гражданства и личного права юридического реальной оседлости лица: критерий регистрации и критерий поселения. статутарной оседлости Недостатки и преимущества инкорпорации и критериев управляющий орган Barcelona Traction ELSI урегулирования были изучены путем сравнительного анализа. В статье также обсуждается противоречие между критериями регистрации и урегулирования на основе судебной практики, научных взглядов ученых и правовых актов. The fact that companies are actively entering the world economy is a requirement of today. As a result, there is a problem of determining the nationality of legal entity. In practice, this problem is difficult to solve because a legal entity can be established in one state, locate a governing body in another state, make products in a third state, and finally, its founders, shareholders can be citizens or legal entities of different states. However, N.N. Voznesenskaya (2017) consider that “the problem of determining the nationality of legal entities rarely arises as an independent one; usually it is “tied” to another problem that it helps to solve” [17,p.118]. The same can be said about personal law. Therefore, it is expedient to consider the criterions that serve to better understand the concepts of nationality and personal law of a legal entity should be distinguish them from each other in order to understand that they are independent concepts. Incorporation or management and control. According to this criterion, the state in which the legal entity is established and registered is its personal law, ie the emergence of a legal entity depends on the will of the state. The emergence of this criterion is associated with the activities of companies that in the Middle Ages gradually began to expand their activities through colonial policies. The reason for this, according to Yu.I. Eremina (2015) “it was necessary to establish guarantees for domestic companies that allowed enterprises incorporated in the UK to transfer governing bodies on the territory of the colonies without the risk of losing their legal capacity” [11.p.90]. The criterion of incorporation (lex incorporationis) was originally common in the Anglo-Saxon countries, but today it is used in the United States, Great Britain, Canada, the Netherlands, Switzerland, India, Nigeria, Australia, New Zealand, Cyprus, and many CIS countries (except Georgia). , Is used in the legislation of a number of Latin American countries (Brazil, Venezuela, Mexico, Peru, Cuba). The criterion of incorporation differs from other criteria in that a legal entity does not lose its legal personality when moving its activities from one state to another. However, the main drawback of this criterion is the most convenient tool for those who want to engage in fraudulent business. Because, according to this criterion, the personal law and nationality of 314 Жамият ва инновациялар – Общество и инновации – Society and innovations Special issue -1, №01 (2020) / ISSN 2181-1415 the legal entity is determined by the law of the state in which it is established, and, of course, the state with the minimum requirements for fake entrepreneurs is chosen. In this sense, the application of the criterion of incorporation is not appropriate. As M. Brun (1915) noted many years ago, “If a company's central body is located in the state and has all the costs and main activities, then the state may not agree that such a legal entity is foreign only because its charter is registered abroad” [6,p.10]. Such a situation can be seen in the activities of shell companies which set up to invest. E.Aziano (2012)points to the following model as a shortcoming of the incorporation: A British investor wants to invest in Iran, but there is no such agreement between the two countries. To get out of the situation, a British investor chooses a country that has signed a bilateral investment agreement with Iran, such as Nigeria, and creates a company that acts as an intermediary in that country, through which it invests in Iran [4,p.7]. R. T. Yusifova (2016) explains the situation as follows: “Now