Subsidiary liability of shareholder according the corporate veil piercing doctrine

Šiame straipsnyje nagrinėjamas akcininko atsakomybės už bendrovės prievoles dėl nesąžiningo elgesio koncepcinis pagrindimas, kuris remiasi piktnaudžiavimo teise doktrina. Analizuojamas akcininko atsakomybės pagal piktnaudžiavimo teise doktrinos ir akcininko deliktinės civilinės atsakomybės bendrųjų normų pagrindu santykis. Straipsnyje taip pat nagrinėjamas akcininko papildomos turtinės prievolės koncepcinis pagrindimas pagal Lietuvos Respublikos civilinio kodekso 2.50 straipsnio 3 dalį.When selecting a legal form for business organization limited liability is currently the predominant feature for the investors, therefore it is important when shareholder may loose its privilege to the limited liability and risk more than its capital contribution. Current developments in bankruptcy of small and medium-sized business sector, especially in closely held companies, in Lithuania, suggests importance to continue discussion on the corporate veil piercing doctrine (as established by par. 3 Art. 2.50 of the Lithuanian Civil Code). The article grounds subsidiary shareholder's liability for its company's debts on the basis o f abuse o f legal entity (e.g. abuse of rights). Liability for abuse of legal entity absorbs tort based liability, as an independent legal ground for shareholder's liability, if, due to the overall intensive shareholder's influence over the company and number of transactions, it would be hardly possible to identify and quantify them each separately for application of particular remedies. It is suggested that Lithuania should follow the continental European practice, where doctrine and jurisprudence develop the corporate veil piercing on basis o f abuse o f rights, as a rest-category for shareholder's liability