Instituto de Estudios Políticos y Derecho Público "Dr. Humberto J. La Roche"
de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad del Zulia
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Esta publicación cientíca en formato digital es continuidad de la revista impresa
ISSN-Versión Impresa 0798-1406 / ISSN-Versión on line 2542-3185Depósito legal pp
197402ZU34
ppi 201502ZU4645
Vol.40 N° 73
Julio
Diciembre
2022
Recibido el 14/04/2022 Aceptado el 26/06/2022
ISSN 0798- 1406 ~ De pó si to le gal pp 198502ZU132
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas
La re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas, es una pu bli ca cn aus pi cia da por el Ins ti tu to
de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che” (IEPDP) de la Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po ti cas de la Uni ver si dad del Zu lia.
En tre sus ob je ti vos fi gu ran: con tri buir con el pro gre so cien tí fi co de las Cien cias
Hu ma nas y So cia les, a tra vés de la di vul ga ción de los re sul ta dos lo gra dos por sus in ves-
ti ga do res; es ti mu lar la in ves ti ga ción en es tas áreas del sa ber; y pro pi ciar la pre sen ta-
ción, dis cu sión y con fron ta ción de las ideas y avan ces cien tí fi cos con com pro mi so so cial.
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas apa re ce dos ve ces al o y pu bli ca tra ba jos ori gi na les con
avan ces o re sul ta dos de in ves ti ga ción en las áreas de Cien cia Po lí ti ca y De re cho Pú bli-
co, los cua les son so me ti dos a la con si de ra ción de ár bi tros ca li fi ca dos.
ESTA PU BLI CA CIÓN APA RE CE RE SE ÑA DA, EN TRE OTROS ÍN DI CES, EN
:
Re vicyhLUZ, In ter na tio nal Po li ti cal Scien ce Abs tracts, Re vis ta In ter ame ri ca na de
Bi blio gra fía, en el Cen tro La ti no ame ri ca no para el De sa rrol lo (CLAD), en Bi blio-
gra fía So cio Eco nó mi ca de Ve ne zue la de RE DIN SE, In ter na tio nal Bi blio graphy of
Po li ti cal Scien ce, Re vencyt, His pa nic Ame ri can Pe rio di cals In dex/HAPI), Ul ri chs
Pe rio di cals Di rec tory, EBS CO. Se en cuen tra acre di ta da al Re gis tro de Pu bli ca cio-
nes Cien tí fi cas y Tec no ló gi cas Ve ne zo la nas del FO NA CIT, La tin dex.
Di rec to ra
L
OIRALITH
M. C
HIRINOS
P
ORTILLO
Co mi Edi tor
Eduviges Morales Villalobos
Fabiola Tavares Duarte
Ma ría Eu ge nia Soto Hernández
Nila Leal González
Carmen Pérez Baralt
Co mi Ase sor
Pedro Bracho Grand
J. M. Del ga do Ocan do
Jo Ce rra da
Ri car do Com bel las
An gel Lom bar di
Die ter Nohlen
Al fre do Ra mos Ji mé nez
Go ran Ther born
Frie drich Welsch
Asis ten tes Ad mi nis tra ti vos
Joan López Urdaneta y Nil da Ma n
Re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas. Av. Gua ji ra. Uni ver si dad del Zu lia. Nú cleo Hu ma nís ti co. Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas. Ins ti tu to de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co
Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che. Ma ra cai bo, Ve ne zue la. E- mail: cues tio nes po li ti cas@gmail.
com ~ loi chi ri nos por til lo@gmail.com. Te le fax: 58- 0261- 4127018.
Vol. 40, Nº 73 (2022), 633-654
IEPDP-Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas - LUZ
Specic characteristics of corporate
rights under Ukrainian legislation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4073.36
Volodymyr Tsikalo *
Abstract
The article is devoted to the study of the peculiarities of the
exercise of corporate rights under the civil law of Ukraine in order
to identify their specic characteristics. Through a documentary
methodology, close to legal hermeneutics, it was concluded
that the participant of a legal entity (company) may have not
only corporate rights but also other rights over this legal entity
(company). Therefore, it is not enough to say that the rights of
a person whose participation is dened in the authorized capital
are corporate. It is important that the content of these rights
is due to the ownership share (share, number of shares) in the
authorized capital of the legal person (company). It was also
found that intangible corporate rights must be distinguished from the
personal intangible rights of the individual. The concepts of “non-economic
rights” and “non-economic personal rights” are not identical. In relation to
a person, intangible rights should be divided into two types: non-economic
rights that are not closely related to a person (e.g., non-economic corporate
rights); intangible rights that are closely related to a person and are
inseparable from a person (personal intangible rights).
Keywords: corporate rights; economic rights; non-economic rights;
public limited company; limited liability company.
* Associate Professor of the Civil and Civil Procedural Department of the Ivan Franko National University
of Lviv, PhD in law, Associate Professor, Lviv, Ukraine. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-
6174-6928
634
Volodymyr Tsikalo
Specic characteristics of corporate rights under Ukrainian legislation
Características especícas de los derechos corporativos
bajo la legislación ucraniana
Resumen
El artículo está dedicado al estudio de las peculiaridades del ejercicio
de los derechos corporativos bajo la legislación civil de Ucrania para
identicar sus características especícas. Mediante una metodología
documental, próxima a la hermenéutica jurídica, se llegó a la conclusión
de que el participante de una entidad legal (empresa) puede tener no solo
derechos corporativos sino también otros derechos sobre esta entidad legal
(empresa). Por lo tanto, no basta con decir que los derechos de una persona
cuya participación se dene en el capital autorizado son corporativos. Es
importante que el contenido de estos derechos se deba a la participación
de la propiedad (acción, número de acciones) en el capital autorizado
de la persona jurídica (empresa). También se encontró que los derechos
corporativos intangibles deben distinguirse de los derechos intangibles
personales del individuo. Los conceptos de “derechos no patrimoniales” y
“derechos personales no patrimoniales” no son idénticos. En relación con
una persona, los derechos intangibles deben dividirse en dos tipos: derechos
no patrimoniales que no están estrechamente relacionados con una
persona (por ejemplo, derechos corporativos no patrimoniales); derechos
intangibles que están estrechamente relacionados con una persona y son
inseparables de una persona (derechos intangibles personales).
Palabras clave: derechos corporativos; derechos patrimoniales;
derechos no patrimoniales; sociedad anónima; sociedad
de responsabilidad limitada.
Introduction
Subjective corporate rights are characterized by certain features of
implementation, which give grounds to distinguish them from other civil
rights. These features of the exercise of corporate rights should be called
essential because they reect their legal nature. The essential features of
the exercise of corporate rights, at present, include legal denitions of this
concept, as well as legal norms that determine the status of their subjects.
However, the signs of the exercise of corporate rights are not suciently
studied in modern theory of civil law. Judicial practice raises a number
of questions to which there is no unambiguous answer either in law or
scientic literature. A unied approach to the signs of exercising corporate
rights has not yet been developed.
635
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 633-654
Acts of the legislation of Ukraine contain dierent denitions of corporate
rights, which complicates the study of the signs of their implementation.
These shortcomings can be eliminated by identifying and clarifying the
essence of the principles of exercising the subjective rights of members of
companies.
Thus, domestic special legal acts regulating the exercise of corporate
rights in various organizational and legal forms of companies, separately
provide for rights that do not belong to each (any) participant (shareholder),
but only to those who have the necessary, the size of the share (number
of shares) in the authorized capital established by law, for example: 5, 10,
95, etc. percent. These corporate rights have a number of features of their
implementation compared to the rights granted to all other participants
(shareholders).
From the analysis of the provisions of the acts of civil legislation of
Ukraine, which contain the concept of subjective “corporate rights”, as well
as establish the features of the legal status of their subjects, we can identify
a number of signs of such rights. These features reveal the essence of
corporate rights; in this sense, they are constitutive because they reect the
content of corporate rights. Based on the analysis of legal provisions and
own scientic position, we can identify the following signs of the exercise of
subjective corporate rights:
1) Conditionality of the exercise of corporate rights by property
participation in the authorized capital of a legal entity.
2) Exercise of corporate rights in relation to joint-stock companies,
limited and additional liability companies.
3) Exercise of non-property and property corporate rights.
1. Methodological Framework
The normative and legal basis of this article was the provisions of the
Civil Code of Ukraine and special legislative acts governing the exercise of
corporate rights. The empirical basis of the study is the materials of the
practice of litigation on the protection of corporate rights by the courts
of Ukraine. The dialectical method of cognition accompanied the whole
process of scientic research and allowed us to consider trends in the
development of legislation on the exercise of corporate rights in the context
of European integration.
The formal-legal method was used in the analysis of legal norms
governing certain features of the exercise of corporate rights and the
practice of their application. Sociological methods of cognition were used
636
Volodymyr Tsikalo
Specic characteristics of corporate rights under Ukrainian legislation
in the analysis of regulations, court decisions and other documents. The
hermeneutic-legal method was used in the process of interpreting the rules
that determine the characteristics of the exercise of corporate rights.
Techniques of legal analysis was used in the study of the signs of the
exercise of corporate rights with the help of legal techniques. Some methods
of comparative law were used for comparative analysis of signs of corporate
rights with other civil rights that may have participants (shareholders) of
companies in relation to these legal entities.
2. Results and discussion
2.1. Conditionality of the exercise of corporate rights by
property participation in the authorized capital of a legal entity
(close connection with the size of the share (number of shares)
Only entities whose share is dened in the authorized (composed)
capital of a legal entity have corporate rights. Moreover, a person who is the
sole member of the company owns one share in the authorized capital, the
amount of which is one hundred percent. The authorized capital of a legal
entity does not have to have several shares.
The certainty of the share in the authorized capital means that corporate
rights can be exercised only in relation to legal entities that: 1) have
authorized capital; 2) there are shares of participants (participants) in their
authorized capital (Zikalo, 2013).
These features of corporate rights U. Yarymovych consider to be
characteristics of “corporate legal entities”: the presence of authorized
(composed) capital; determination in the authorized (composed) capital
(property) of the participant’s share, which gives him or her corporate
rights (Yarymovych, 2012: 31). As points out I. Lukach a participant’s share
in the authorized capital makes it possible to distinguish corporations from
other legal entities where there is no authorized capital divided into shares
(Lukach, 2016).
Some scholars question this legislative provision. Thus, according to
the authors of the textbook “Economic Law of Ukraine”, such an approach
is impractical, because regardless of the type of enterprise (unitary or
corporate) the essence of the relationship between the founder (participant)
and the enterprise is the same and corporate enterprises are the same.
The only dierence is the presence of not one, but two or more owners
of corporate rights in corporate enterprises, but this limit is actually erased
with the introduction of the possibility of creating sole proprietorships
(Gaivoronsky and Zhushman, 2005). A similar position is supported by O.
637
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 73 (2022): 633-654
Kibenko on the example of the legal conclusions of the Grand Chamber of
the Supreme Court: corporate law is a right that arises from participation
in the capital of a legal entity. It does not matter whether such capital is
divided into shares or not, the legal entity has one or more participants
(Kibenko, 2019).
It is dicult to agree with this interpretation of corporate rights in
relation to the relevant legal entities. The dierence between corporate and
unitary legal entities is not in the number of their founders (participants),
but in the nature of the legal relationship between them and the legal entity.
As rightly points out Yu. Beck, the creation of an enterprise by one founder
is not the only criterion for determining the unitary type of enterprise, other
criteria must be taken into account, including the distribution of authorized
capital, enterprise management, income distribution, etc. (Beck, 2013).
Legal entities are divided into unitary and corporate, including depending
on the method of establishment and formation of authorized capital (fund)
(Tsikalo, 2008).
A unitary legal entity is not the owner of the property assigned to it, but
acts on other legal regimes of property, for example, on the right of trust
property and the right to manage someone else’s property (duciary fund),
etc. The owner of the property of a unitary legal entity is its founder, who
should be held civilly liable for the obligations of the legal entity created
by him. A corporate legal entity always acts on the right of ownership, and
its founder (founders) acquires (acquire) corporate rights over it (Tsikalo,
2010). As a general rule, a corporate legal entity and its founder (s) cannot
be held civilly liable for each other’s obligations.
Representatives of legal science emphasize the dierent legal regimes
of property of unitary and corporate legal entities in the context of
possible corporatization of state and municipal unitary enterprises. Thus,
O. Belyanevich and O. Podtserkovny drew attention to the fact that the
transformation of unitary state and municipal enterprises and organizations
into companies will change the legal regime of property of these legal
entities to property rights, as corporate enterprises are given ownership of
their assigned property (Belyanevych and Podtserkovny, 2019).
The Commercial Code of Ukraine emphasizes that a corporate is a legal
entity formed, as a rule, by two or more founders. The caveat “usually” means
that it may have one founder; not always two or more founders take part in
the creation of a society. Therefore, the basis for the division of legal entities
into corporate and unitary should be taken not the quantitative criterion of
the founders (participants), but the nature of the legal relationship between
them and the legal entity.
Determining the share of the founder (participant) in the authorized
capital of a legal entity means that the content of its rights is in connection