TFL Vsebine / Revija Pravnik

9

Namen članka je zapolniti vrzel v slovenski literaturi na področju preučevanja postopka odpusta obveznosti. V prvem delu članka avtor predstavlja temeljna teoretična spoznanja o osebnem stečaju, s poudarkom na teorijah o racionalizaciji postopka odpusta obveznosti. Avtor odpust obveznosti razume predvsem kot sistem pravnih spodbud v obliki korenčka, katerih cilj je, da motivirajo dolžnika, da kljub insolventnosti še naprej sodeluje z upniki in s tem upnikom omogoči boljše poplačilo terjatev. Ta kompromisni odnos je po mnenju avtorja najpomembnejše vprašanje postopka osebnega stečaja in odpusta obveznosti. Iz analize slovenske sodne prakse izhaja, da so imela sodišča na začetku težave pri utemeljevanju odmere dolžine preizkusne dobe in da na odmero preizkusne dobe vplivajo tudi kriteriji, ki jih zakonodajalec sploh ne predvideva. Avtor v zaključku komentira tudi sprejeto novelo ZFPPIPP-G in poudarja, da nova opredelitev namena postopka odpusta obveznosti, skupaj uporabo generalne klavzule kot omejitve za odpust obveznosti v kombinaciji s primeroma naštetimi izpodbojnimi domnevami prinaša v sistem odpusta obveznosti tisto prožnost, ki jo po mnenju mnogih sodišča do zdaj niso imela. Zakonodajalec je s tem sodiščem še povečal vlogo pri odločanju o odpustu obveznosti.

This article seeks to fill the gap in the Slovenian literature in the field of debt discharge as a part of the personal bankruptcy proceedings. The first part of the article presents the basic theoretical knowledge about personal bankruptcy, with an emphasis on theories of rationalizing the debt discharge proceedings. The author defines the debt discharge as a system of legal incentives in the form of a carrot, that aim to motivate the insolvent debtor to cooperate with the creditors and enables them a better repayment of their claims. Defining the right trade-off between the creditor’s rights and debtors incentives to cooperate is the single most important question of the debt discharge proceedings. The analysis of the Slovenian case law shows that courts initially had difficulties in setting and justifying the length of the probation period for the debt discharge and that the assessment of the period was influenced by criteria not regulated by the law. The final part of the paper analyses the latest amendments to the Slovenian Financial Operations, Insolvency Proceedings and Compulsory Winding-up Act ZFPPIPP-G. The author stresses that the new definition of the goals of the debt discharge proceedings, combined with the nomotechnical usage of a general clause combined with some rebuttable presumption, brings to the system additional flexibility to the court’s decision making that was non-existent until now.

Debt Discharge in Personal Bankruptcy