Personligt betalningsansvar för styrelseledamöter i aktiebolag
(2017) HARH01 20162Department of Business Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Sammanfattning
Grundtanken med aktiebolag som bolagsform är att den ekonomiska risken inte ska överstiga insatt kapital. Det finns i aktiebolagslagen ingen direkt koppling mellan bolagets företrädare och bolaget som är en egen juridisk person. Men det finns situationer som gör att bolagets företrädare kan bli personligt betalningsansvarig för bolagets förpliktelser, ett så kallat medansvar. Uppsatsen kommer att visa olika situationer i vilka en styrelseledamot i bolaget kan bli personligt betalningsansvarig.
Kapitalbristreglerna (25 kap. 13-20a §§ aktiebolagslagen) är utformade för att skydda bolagets kapital och syftar till att skydda befintliga och tillkommande borgenärer. Kritisk kapitalbrist innebär att bolagets kapital... (More) - Sammanfattning
Grundtanken med aktiebolag som bolagsform är att den ekonomiska risken inte ska överstiga insatt kapital. Det finns i aktiebolagslagen ingen direkt koppling mellan bolagets företrädare och bolaget som är en egen juridisk person. Men det finns situationer som gör att bolagets företrädare kan bli personligt betalningsansvarig för bolagets förpliktelser, ett så kallat medansvar. Uppsatsen kommer att visa olika situationer i vilka en styrelseledamot i bolaget kan bli personligt betalningsansvarig.
Kapitalbristreglerna (25 kap. 13-20a §§ aktiebolagslagen) är utformade för att skydda bolagets kapital och syftar till att skydda befintliga och tillkommande borgenärer. Kritisk kapitalbrist innebär att bolagets kapital understiger hälften av det registrerade aktiekapitalet. Styrelseledamöterna måste agera och förhålla sig till lagstadgad handlingsplikt. Att som styrelseledamot inte agera enligt sin handlingsplikt kan leda till medansvar, vilket innebär personligt betalningsansvar för de förpliktelser som uppstår under ansvarstiden, den så kallade ansvarsperioden. Som huvudregel är det personliga betalningsansvaret solidariskt mellan styrelseledamöterna, men kan styrelseledamot visa att det inte föreligger försumlighet genom en så kallad ansvarsfrihetsgrund, kan styrelseledamoten undgå personligt betalningsansvar. Styrelseledamoten kan också tillse att den kritiska kapitalbristen inom en till två månader blir läkt för att undgå medansvar. Ansvarsperioden fortgår tills aktiekapitalet har återställts till det registrerade aktiekapitalet.
Det personliga betalningsansvaret för en nytillträdd styrelseledamot är inte reglerad i lag. I stället blir det den nytillträdda styrelseledamotens agerande i det enskilda fallet som kommer att bedömas. Även för en avgående styrelseledamot är det inte uttryckligen reglerat i lag vilket ansvar som gäller. Högsta domstolen anser att det skulle strida mot lagens syfte om uppkomna förpliktelser skulle upphöra i samband med styrelseledamotens avgång.
Något inte helt ovanligt har blivit att bolag använder sig av någon form av kapitaltäckningsgaranti för att minimera den ekonomiska risken för styrelsens ledamöter. Men som kommer att påvisas så finns det ingen absolut omständighet som säkerställer ett uteslutande av personligt betalningsansvar. (Less) - Abstract
- Summary
The basic idea of the limited company corporate form is that the financial risk should not exceed the invested capital. It is available in the companies act no direct linkbetween the company's representatives and the company, which is a separate legal entity. But there are situations that will allow the company's representative can be personally liable for the company's obligations, known as a joint responsibility. The paper will show different situations as a member of the Board of Directors of the company may become personally liable for.
Capital shortage conditions (25 kap. 13-20a §§ companies Act) are designed to protect the company's capital and at the same time be a creditor protection in order to protect existing and... (More) - Summary
The basic idea of the limited company corporate form is that the financial risk should not exceed the invested capital. It is available in the companies act no direct linkbetween the company's representatives and the company, which is a separate legal entity. But there are situations that will allow the company's representative can be personally liable for the company's obligations, known as a joint responsibility. The paper will show different situations as a member of the Board of Directors of the company may become personally liable for.
Capital shortage conditions (25 kap. 13-20a §§ companies Act) are designed to protect the company's capital and at the same time be a creditor protection in order to protect existing and future creditors. Critical capital shortage means that the company's capital is less than half of the registered share capital. Board member must act and relate to statutory action. The Board does not act in accordance with their duty of action can lead to joint responsibility, which means personal liability for the obligations that arise during the period of responsibility, the so-called period of liability. As a main rule, the personal liability in solidarity between the members of the Management Board, but the Board can demonstrate that there has been negligence by a so-called discharge because, the Board member to escape personal liability. The Board Member may also be in one to two months to heal the critical capital shortage in order to evade responsibility. The liability period continues until the share capital has been restored to the registered share capital.
The personal liability of a newly appointed member of the Board of Directors is not regulated by law. Instead, it will be the new Executive Director's actions in the case that will be assessed. Even for a retiring Board Member, it is not explicitly regulated by law the responsibility that apply. The Supreme Court is of the opinion that it would be contrary to the policy of the law if the resulting obligations would cease in connection with Board Member's resignation.
Something not entirely uncommon has become the Board's using some form of capital guarantee to minimise the financial risk for the members of the Board.
But, as will be demonstrated, there is no absolute evidence to ensure the exclusion of personal liability. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8900234
- author
- Jämhammar, Ulf LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- HARH01 20162
- year
- 2017
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- tvångslikvidation, kapitalbrist, personligt, betalningsansvar, medansvar, rättelse, styrelseledamot, tillträdande, avgående
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8900234
- date added to LUP
- 2017-01-20 11:40:58
- date last changed
- 2017-01-20 11:40:58
@misc{8900234,
abstract = {{Summary
The basic idea of the limited company corporate form is that the financial risk should not exceed the invested capital. It is available in the companies act no direct linkbetween the company's representatives and the company, which is a separate legal entity. But there are situations that will allow the company's representative can be personally liable for the company's obligations, known as a joint responsibility. The paper will show different situations as a member of the Board of Directors of the company may become personally liable for.
Capital shortage conditions (25 kap. 13-20a §§ companies Act) are designed to protect the company's capital and at the same time be a creditor protection in order to protect existing and future creditors. Critical capital shortage means that the company's capital is less than half of the registered share capital. Board member must act and relate to statutory action. The Board does not act in accordance with their duty of action can lead to joint responsibility, which means personal liability for the obligations that arise during the period of responsibility, the so-called period of liability. As a main rule, the personal liability in solidarity between the members of the Management Board, but the Board can demonstrate that there has been negligence by a so-called discharge because, the Board member to escape personal liability. The Board Member may also be in one to two months to heal the critical capital shortage in order to evade responsibility. The liability period continues until the share capital has been restored to the registered share capital.
The personal liability of a newly appointed member of the Board of Directors is not regulated by law. Instead, it will be the new Executive Director's actions in the case that will be assessed. Even for a retiring Board Member, it is not explicitly regulated by law the responsibility that apply. The Supreme Court is of the opinion that it would be contrary to the policy of the law if the resulting obligations would cease in connection with Board Member's resignation.
Something not entirely uncommon has become the Board's using some form of capital guarantee to minimise the financial risk for the members of the Board.
But, as will be demonstrated, there is no absolute evidence to ensure the exclusion of personal liability.}},
author = {{Jämhammar, Ulf}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Personligt betalningsansvar för styrelseledamöter i aktiebolag}},
year = {{2017}},
}