TFL Vsebine / Revija Pravnik

1

Zakon o lekarniški dejavnosti (ZLD-1) ne odgovarja neposredno na vprašanje, ali je menjava nosilca lekarniške dejavnosti v družbi koncesionarki – ki glede na aktualno ureditev ZLD-1 nujno vključuje tudi, da ta prevzame poslovodstvo družbe – koncesionarja in večinski delež v njenem kapitalu – dopustna z vidika ureditve koncesije na področju lekarniške dejavnosti, ki jo zadevna družba izvaja. Na to pomanjkljivost nacionalne pravne ureditve je posebej opozorilo tudi Ustavno sodišče v svoji odločbi U-I-166/17 z dne 5. novembra 2020. Avtorja ta vprašanja obravnavata v okviru širšega konteksta pravne ureditve EU na področju koncesij. Tako ugotavljata, da je sprememba nosilca lekarniške dejavnosti pri lekarni – koncesionarju s tega vidika lahko dopustna, in sicer ob pogoju, če se glede na konkretne okoliščine posameznega primera ugotovi, da gre za situacijo »sprememb […] izključno notranje reorganizacije«, kot jih opredeljuje tudi točka 77 preambule Direktive 2014/23/EU.

The Slovenian Pharmacy Practice Act (Zakon o lekarniški dejavnosti – ZLD-1) does not provide a direct answer as to whether changing the responsible pharmacist in a company that holds a concession in this field (which, according to the current provisions of the ZLD-1, necessarily implies that the same person must simultaneously assume both the business management of the concessionaire company and a majority share in its capital) is admissible from the perspective of concession regulation under ZLD-1. In its decision U-I-166/17 of 5 November 2020, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia specifically drew attention to the shortcomings of the ZLD-1 provisions on concessions in this regard. The article examines the issue within the broader context of EU concession law. The authors argue that changing the responsible pharmacist may be permissible, provided that, taking into account specific circumstances of such an organisational change, it remains within the limits of »structural changes during the performance of the concession«, as described in paragraph 77 of preamble of Directive 2014/23/EU.

Frontline Administrative Emergency Decision- Making. On the Rule of Law vs Efficiency Dilemma and on the Role of Infra-Law