Whether the set-off of the monetary equivalents is allowed in restitution where the contract is recognized void by claim of company in bankruptcy process due to creditors' rights infringement?

Šio darbo tikslas išanalizuoti ir įvertinti teisinę galimybę taikyti priešpriešinių piniginių ekvivalentų įskaitymą, panaikinus sutartį su bankrutuojančia įmone dėl kreditorių teisių pažeidimo, atskleisti esamus teisinio reguliavimo trūkumus. Darbo tikslui pasiekti buvo išsikelti šie uždaviniai: pirmiausia buvo siekiama aptarti ir išanalizuoti bankroto teisinio reguliavimo modelius, ir išsiaiškinti koks bankroto teisinio reguliavimo modelis taikomas Lietuvos teisėje bei kaip jis įtakoja įskaitymo instituto taikymą įmonių bankroto bylose. Toliau darbe buvo siekiama nustatyti draudimo taikyti įskaitymo institutą priežastis ir aptarti įskaitymo instituto taikymo išimtis, įmonei iškėlus bankroto bylą. Trečioje darbo dalyje buvo siekiama išanalizuoti restitucijos natūra būdo pakeitimo į piniginį ekvivalentą pagrindus. Toliau darbe buvo siekiama įvertinti teisinę galimybę taikyti priešpriešinį piniginių ekvivalentų įskaitymą, panaikinus sutartį su bankrutuojančia įmone dėl kreditorių teisių pažeidimo. Galiausiai atlikus bankroto teisinius santykius reglamentuojančių teisės aktų ir teismų praktikos, formuojamos nagrinėjant bankroto bylas, susijusias su įskaitymo instituto taikymu, išsamią analizę, nustatyti teisinio reguliavimo trūkumus ir pateikti įstatymų leidėjui jų tobulinimo pasiūlymus bei rekomendacijas. Išsikeltiems uždaviniams įgyvendinti ir darbo tikslui pasiekti, darbe buvo naudojami šie metodai: istorinis tyrimo metodas, lyginamasis, lingvistinis metodas, dokumentų analizės metodas, teologinis ir loginis tyrimo metodai. Remiantis išsamia, keturiose darbo dalyse atlikta teorine bei praktine problemos tyrimo analize, įgyvendinus išsikeltus uždavinius bei darbo tikslą, darbo pabaigoje pateikiamos išvados: 1. Civilinė teisė nedraudžia atlikti įskaitymo skolininko nemokumo atveju. 2. Europos Sąjungos teisė nedraudžia atlikti įskaitymo įmonei iškėlus bankroto bylą. 3. Draudimas atlikti įskaitymą įmonei iškėlus bankroto bylą kyla iš draudimo įmonei iškėlus bankroto bylą vykdyti finansines prievoles.Bankroto teisinius santykius reglamentuojantys teisės aktai numato tam tikras išimtis, kuomet įmonei iškėlus bankroto bylą vis tik galima vykdyti finansines prievoles. 4. Restitucijos natūra būdo pakeitimą į piniginį ekvivalentą lemia tai, jog restitucija natūra yra negalima - skolinininkas neturi turto, arba kai restitucijos natūra taikymas prieštarauja sąžiningumo, protingumo ir teisingumo principams ir restitucijos natūra taikymas sukeltų prievolės šalims didelių nepatogumų. Tokiais atvejais teismas turi diskrecijos teisę restituciją natūra pakeisti į piniginį ekvivalentą. 5. Kadangi įstatymas numato išimtis, kuomet leidžiamai įmonei vykdyti finansines prievoles, nors jai ir yra iškelta bankroto byla, o teismas turi diskrecijos teisę restitucija natūra pakeisti į piniginį ekvivalentą, todėl iš sandorio pripažinimo negaliojančiu, kurį inicijuoja pati bankrutuojanti įmonė, kylantys du priešpriešiniai reikalavimai, turėtų būti leidžiami įskaityti.Ever since ancient times there was a problem when the debtor was unable to fulfill its obligations to creditors and there were a variety of solutions to these problems: from ancient Roman Law of the Twelve Tables when the creditors had the right to kill the debtor and divided his body to the modern law with its applying and searching for new and effective solutions to these problems in order to ensure both parties, both the debtor and the creditor interests. In recent years, people, in the deteriorating economic situation, begin more frequently to discuss and to talk about bankruptcy and its related problems. The legislature, consolidating in the laws and other legal acts, the rules that regulates the enterprise bankruptcy procedure, based on a certain model of legal regulation of bankruptcy, which helps to disclose what the legislature is trying to achieve and whose interests' protection he gives the priority. Bankruptcy of an enterprise and the procedure of bankruptcy execution is extremely difficult economic, social and legal phenomenon. The institute of bankruptcy procedures, problems and their solution related to its application, after the restoration of the statehood of Lithuania, is a relatively new phenomenon therefore regulation of legal relationships of bankruptcy procedure is not an easy task. Novelty of bankruptcy law in the Lithuanian legal system and the lack of legal literature determine that it is more appropriate not only to examine specific problematic aspect of bankruptcy law, in this case, the permissibility of set-off of monetary equivalents where the contract is recognized void by claim of company in bankruptcy due to creditors' rights infringement, but to provide theoretical possible solutions of such problematic issues of bankruptcy law and to propose to apply them in solutions for specific case issues. Not all the questions of the institute of set-off application have the same social, resolution and significance. The representatives of legal science consider the most problems of the institute of set-off application to be formal, and only a small part of the offsetting issues leads to a broad debate among scientists, also in scientific point of view not all aspects of the institute of set-off application are equally interesting and relevant. The institute of set-off application, in case of enterprise’s bankruptcy proceedings, is one of the most problematic issues. In accordance with Lithuanian case law, the creditor’s and the debtor’s reciprocal claims set-off are forbidden when an enterprise enters bankruptcy proceedings. For the above reasons, in case of effective solution of both theoretical and practical issues related to bankruptcy procedure of an enterprise, scientific analysis becomes very relevant and basically helps the legislature to make a decision and to choose one or another model of legal regulation of bankruptcy proceedings. Therefore, this type of scientific research work not only helps to complete gaps in legislation of bankruptcy legal relationships, helps to improve them, but makes legislation of bankruptcy legal relationships application in practice simpler, clearer, helps quicker and more economically to solve the problems related with bankruptcy legal relationships. The object of this research was to analyze and to evaluate the possibility of the application of counterclaim set-off of monetary equivalents where the contract is recognized void by claim of company in bankruptcy process due to creditors' rights infringement. To disclose the purpose, the author raised the following objectives of the work: first, it was intended to discuss and analyze the models of legal regulation of bankruptcy, and find out what model of legal regulation of bankruptcy applies in Lithuanian law and how it affects the institute of set-off application of company bankruptcy cases. Further the work was aimed to identify the causes of the institute of set-off application insurance and to discuss the exceptions of the institute of set-off application when an enterprise enters bankruptcy proceedings. In the third part of this work the basis of changes in the way of restitution to cash equivalent was analyzed. After the models of legal regulation of bankruptcy was discussed, found out what objectives seeks the legislature, using one or another model and tried to disclose the reasons of the institute of set-off application insurance, discussed it’s application exceptions, and analyzed the basis of changes in the way of restitution to monetary equivalent, further work was aimed to evaluate the legal possibility of application of counterclaim set-off of monetary equivalents after the recognition of a contract with the bankrupt enterprise invalid for the creditors' rights infringement. Finally, legislation of bankruptcy legal relationships and judicial practice, formed in the context of bankruptcy proceedings, related to the institute of set-off application, was comprehensive analyzed, the regulatory gaps was identified and their improvement proposals and recommendations were provided to the legislature. With the purpose to attain the tasks of the work the author complexly used these methods: historical method, comparative, linguistic method, analysis of documents, theological and logical methods. Final stage of the research generalizes the implementation of the four parts of the work, the objective of the work and tasks raised, the work ends with conclusions: 1. The model of legal regulation of bankruptcy which is used in legal system, influence to whom interests protection the government takes a priority. In Lithuanian legal system, the legislature gives priority to the interests of creditor protection, but the courts, acting in the bankruptcy proceedings to the bankruptcy process try to ensure both parties' interests balance. It can be concluded that the courts is tend to use neutral model. 2. Prohibition to use the set-off in bankruptcy process is result of courts practice rather than the result of legislature legal regulation. Neither Lithuanian bankruptcy law, neither European Union bankruptcy law expressis verbis do not prohibited to use the set-off when for debtor is raised bankruptcy. Also Lithuanian civil law does not prohibited to use the set-off when company is insolvency. 3. Prohibition to use set-off when company is in bankruptcy process arises from the prohibition to exercise the financial obligations. Lithuanian bankruptcy law provides a certain exceptions to exercise the financial obligations for the company when it is in bankruptcy process. 4. When restitution is not impossible because the debtor do not have an asset or restitution infringe the principles of fairness, reasonableness and justice or restitution caused considerable inconvenience to the parties of obligation, in such cases the court has discretion to change restitution in to the monetary equivalent. 5. Granted that Lithuanian bankruptcy law provides a certain exceptions to exercise the financial obligations for the company when it is in bankruptcy process and the court discretion right to change restitution in to the monetary equivalent, the set-off of the monetary equivalent must be applied where the contract is recognized void, because this process initiated itself bankruptcy company.Vytauto Didžiojo universiteta