Legal nature of decisions made by meetings

The reformation of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation determined the relevance of justification and specification of the legal nature of meetings. As a consequence of the numerous impugnments of resolutions made by various meetings the Code included a chapter covering this phenomenon. The specialists in legal law and practicing lawyers still have no shared vision of unequivocal belonging of meetings’ resolution to a jural fact or a civil transaction. An action of a person may be regarded as a jural fact if it has civil legal value, as well as the will and awareness as factors invoking an event (the author considers the case of concerted wills of the assembly participants, which are focused on the achievement of a shared goal - the resolution of the meeting). O.A. Krasavchikov distinguishes two types of legal action: mutual, for which collaborative nature is typical and they make up a united volition, and co-directional, in which despite some internal coordination each action remains relatively independent. On this basis the decision of the meeting may be called mutual (co-directional) legal action. As regards the question of considering the assembly resolution as a civil transaction, it is reasonable to refer to the opinion of G.V. Tsepov, who distinguishes “deal resolutions” (increase of authorized capital, election of board members, etc.) and “non-deal resolutions” (approval of annual reports) according to whether their objective is creation, change or termination of civil rights and duties, or not. The authors’ position is that any resolution of the meeting that can be regarded as a jural fact is to be termed a civil transaction.