Stocks as non-monetary founding deposit of economic society

The writer of this paper, as it can be concluded, has a very critical attitude towards the Agency for Business Registers of the RS. He is not satisfied with the Agency in almost any segment of the work and believes that the court handled these cases much better and faster. The media campaign that was organized and successfully implemented, and in connection with the slowness of the work of the courts and lack of promptness, now completely falls into the water when you see how much time the Agency needs to solve some things. This state of affairs is completely unsustainable and I believe that the Ministry of Economy should react as soon as possible and take some measures to resolve the entire situation. However, the good will and good intentions shown by all the employees of the Agency should not be ignored or noticed, but it is still too little to solve concrete issues and problems. I believe that time will show who was right when the Agency was founded, as well as what the real effects of the Agency's work and operations are. As for the specific problem, to which I have devoted a certain space here, I am of the opinion that it can be viewed from two different sides. _ The first side is the practical side and, by interpretation, is strictly related to the law. Therefore, according to this point of view, there are no legal limits and obstacles for the establishment of limited liability companies in which the founding capital is shares. This is expressly provided by the ZPD and the Agency fully acts and applies the Law when establishing a doo with a specific founding capital - share. In this situation, the founders do not violate any positive legal regulation. As we know, owners of shares are completely free to dispose of their shares - more precisely, their assets. The way in which they will be managed is in the complete freedom of the owners themselves, which, among other things, the Constitution itself foresees. The decision of the owners of the shares to invest their shares in the doo in the name of the non-monetary founding capital is completely legitimate and legal. By establishing a doo, the founders acquire shares in the doo according to the amount of invested shares and according to the share they have in the company, they participate in the management and management of the company. By acting in this way, according to this point of view, the owners of the shares do not lose their shares. Only the form of drawing the corpus of rights and obligations from them changes, while everything else remains the same. After investing shares in a limited liability company, owners of shares can no longer specifically invest them in another limited liability company, they cannot sell them as shares, they cannot encumber them, etc. However, their essential rights are not denied. As the founders of a limited liability company, they can also be the founders of a large number of other companies through the limited liability company. Furthermore, they can sell their share in the limited liability company and thus essentially dispose of it by selling their share of the shares they own. In accordance with the new ZPD, shares in doo can be encumbered and pledged, so share owners are not denied this right either. The conclusion is that if we accept this point of view, then it is completely permissible and legally founded to enter shares as founding capital in a limited liability company. This is not against the law. On the contrary, the owners of the shares do not lose anything in essence, because they exercise all the rights as if they had shares, only in a slightly different way. In this opinion, the protest of the Commission for HOV as well as other competent institutions that deal with the securities market, in relation to this problem, is not at all positively-legally grounded, and should not be paid special attention to. The opinions and positions of the Commission for HOV are not legally binding and are not a source of law, and represent only the thinking and interpretation of certain legal provisions of a group of people. _ The other side of the view is completely opposite to the above. So, everything that was mentioned above, but only in the reverse sense, if we look at this problem like this, the owners of the shares are damaged. By investing shares in a limited liability company, their owners essentially lose their shares. It is true that they can exercise certain rights from actions, but the question arises in what way and how. It is not the same whether the share is sold on the stock exchange or as a share in a limited liability company. Likewise, it is not the same whether only a share or a share in a doo is pledged. Therefore, the owners of shares are damaged and lose a large number of rights that they have as their owners.