Digital technologies and access to information about corporate dispute
https://doi.org/10.38044/2686-9136-2024-5-6
Abstract
In resolving corporate disputes of many kinds, the rights and legitimate interests of a considerable number of individuals may be impacted. Consequently, the establishment of specific procedural guidelines that would ensure the timely inclusion of all interested parties in the process is of paramount importance. According to Article 225.4 of the Russian Arbitrazh Procedure Code, the arbitrazh court has the authority to require a legal entity to notify its members of a corporate dispute. However, the law does not specify the procedure for the fulfillment of such an obligation by a corporation. In this note, the author considers approaches to employing digital technologies by a legal entity to inform its members and other individuals stipulated by the law regarding the emergence of a corporate dispute. An analysis of the current legislation reveals that the electronic form of notification is required exclusively for public joint-stock corporations. The author concludes that non-public business partnerships as well as non-public corporations must expressly provide for the use of electronic forms of notification to their participants and other persons specified in the law about a corporate dispute in the legal entity’s charter. This approach ensures the prompt dissemination of information about corporate disputes among the interested parties, thereby notification periods established by the arbitrazh court’s established notification periods. In cases where a legal entity’s charter lacks provisions for notifying about the emergence of a corporate dispute, the procedure of notifying about a meeting on rendering corporate decision or absentee voting should be applied.
About the Author
D. Yu. Ionova
Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dina Yu. Ionova — Ph.D. in Law, Associate Professor, Department of Civil and Administrative Procedure named after M. S. Shakaryan
9-2, Sadovaya-Kudrunskaya St., Moscow, Russia, 125993
References
1. Gabov, А. V. (2021). Elektronnoe vzaimodeystvie i tsifrovye tekhnologii v korporativnom upravlenii aktsionernym obshchestvom v Rossii [Electronic interaction and digital technologies in corporate governance of a joint-stock company in Russia]. Law Journal of the Higher School of Economics, (2), 24–64. https://doi.org/10.17323/2072-8166.2021.2.24.64
2. Gutnikov, O. V. (2020). Tendentsii razvitiya korporativnogo prava v sovremennykh usloviyakh [Corporate law development trends at the present time]. Zhurnal Rossijskogo Prava, (8), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.12737/jrl.2020.094
3. Kharitonova, Y., & Shitkina, I. (2021). Stat’ya 36. Poryadok sozyva obshchego sobraniya uchastnikov obshchestva [Article 36. The procedure for convening the general meeting of the company’s members]. In I. S. Shitkina (Ed.), Nauchno-prakticheskiy kommentariy k Federal’nomu zakonu “Ob obshchestvakh s ogranichennoy otvetstvennost’yu” [Scientific and practical commentary on the Federal Law “On Limited Liability Companies”] (Vol 2, pp. 78–82). Statut.
4. Laptev, V. A. (2023). Puti razvitiya tsifrovogo pravosudiya v Rossii v sfere arbitrazhnogo sudoproizvodstva [Ways of developing digital justice in Russia in the field of arbitrazh proceedings]. Vestnik Ekonomicheskogo Pravosudiya Rossiyskoy Federatsii, (5), 168–187. https://doi.org/10.37239/2500-2643-2022-18-5-168-187
5. Mingaleev, P. R. (2023). Application of electronic tools by participants in commercial proceedings. Digital Law Journal, 4(1), 86–128. https://doi.org/10.38044/2686-9136-2023-4-1-86-128
6. Razdyakonov, E. (2020). Pravo na poluchenie informatsii o sudebnom korporativnom spore [The right to receive information about a judicial corporate dispute]. Arbitrazhnyj i Grazhdanskiy Protsess, (6), 29–33.
7. Sherstyuk, V. M. (2012). Deystvuyushchiy APK RF — etap v razvitii arbitrazhnogo processual’nogo zakonodatel’stva [Current Commercial Procedural Code of the Russian Federation — a stage in legal development of commercial procedure]. Zakonodatel’stvo, (6), 46–59.
8. Valeev, D. Kh., & Nuriev, A. G. (2020). Protsessual’nyye posledstviya dinamiki uluchsheniya urovnya sudebnoy zashchity v usloviyakh tsifrovoy ekonomiki [Procedural consequences of the dynamics of the improvement of the judicial protection level in conditions of digital economy]. Rossiyskiy Sud’ya, (7), 60–64. https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-3791-2020-7-60-64
9. Yakusheva, Е. E. (2021). Tsifrovye tekhnologii i obespechenie dostupnosti pravosudiya [Digital technologies and accessibility of justice]. Arbitrazhnyj i Grazhdanskiy Protsess, (7), 8–12. https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-383X-2021-7-8-12
10. Zhurbin, B. (2012). Voprosy podgotovki i rassmotreniya sudami po sushchestvu del po proizvodnym iskam [Issues of preparation and consideration by the courts on the merits of cases on derivative claims]. Arbitrazhnyi i Grazhdanskiy Protsess, (1), 18–22.
Review
Views:
30
Email this article 