Ocena i sitne greške Zakona o stečaju

Abstract

Pisac u ovom radu ocenjuje Zakon o stečaju, koji je Srbija donela 2009. godine, ukazujući na tri male greške. Iako je taj zakon znatno bolji od starog zakona u stečajnoj materiji, kojeg je ukinuo, u njemu se javlja niz grešaka. Neke od njih su krupne, kao što je povreda Ustava Srbije, te nikako nisu smele da se dogode. Druge greške si sitne i gotovo uobičajene u mnogim srpskim zakonima, ali ih učeni pravnici ne bi učinili. Sitne greške tiču se odlučujućeg glasa predsednika odbora poverilaca, stupanja na snagu zakona i nepostojanja pravila o sudskoj likvidaciji u zakonu. U radu se razmatraju uzroci grešaka, kao i posledice koje bi mogle da izazovu. Zaključuje se da su greške mogle da se izbegnu ozbiljnijim promišljanjem zakonopisaca.

In this paper the author makes a brief review and estimation of the Insolvency Act, which Serbia enacted in 2009, pointing to three small mistakes in it. Though that Act is much better than the old one, which it repealed, it has several mistakes. Some of them are significant, such as violation of the Constitution of Serbia, for which reason they may have not happened in any case. The others are small and almost usual for many Serbian acts, which sophisticated jurists certainly would not have made. They are the subject of this paper. Small mistakes relate to decisive vote of the president of the creditors' board, entering into force of the Act and omission of regulation of judicial solvent liquidation. The author tries to investigate causes of the mistakes, as well as their possible consequences. The conclusion is that the mistakes could be avoided by more serious cogitation of the act-writers.