Milchakova O.V. —
Features of foreign investment in business companies that occupy a dominant position in the commodity market
// Legal Studies. – 2024. – ¹ 10.
– P. 1 - 14.
DOI: 10.25136/2409-7136.2024.10.72160
URL: https://en.e-notabene.ru/lr/article_72160.html
Read the article
Abstract: The object of the study is certain issues of the procedure for foreign investments in strategic sectors of the economy. The subject of the study is devoted to the procedure for making foreign investments in business entities that occupy a dominant position in the commodity market.
The dominant economic entity has market power, which provides an opportunity to shape the economic environment by determining the number of market participants, the behavior of suppliers of goods (works, services) and their consumers.
The author examines the issues of necessary regulatory approvals of transactions of foreign investors for the acquisition of assets of dominant entities, as well as general antitrust and special rules for determining the existence of a dominant position in business entities operating in various sectors of the economy.
The methodological basis of the study was based on systematic and formal legal methods, as well as the method of technical and legal analysis.
The conclusions of the study are based on the constitutionally significant goals of ensuring national defense and state security, Russian legislation provides for the need to obtain additional regulatory approvals for foreign participation in business entities that occupy a dominant position on the market.
At the same time, the book value of assets and the amount of revenue of a foreign investor does not matter, a group of persons to which he belongs, as well as a business entity whose assets are planned to be acquired by a foreign investor (a group of persons to which a foreign investor belongs), unlike transactions subject to approval within the framework of antimonopoly control.
In some cases, the control of foreign investments applies special rules for determining the fact of market dominance for some business entities, which differ from the rules of antimonopoly legislation.
Milchakova O. —
Priority of public interests in the regulation of foreign participation
in strategic sectors of the economy
// Law and Politics. – 2023. – ¹ 6.
– P. 69 - 78.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2023.6.40910
URL: https://en.e-notabene.ru/lpmag/article_40910.html
Read the article
Abstract: The author discusses some topical issues of the balance of private and public interests in the framework of limiting foreign presence in the areas of economic activity that are strategically important for the state. In 2022 - 2023 State policy in the field of foreign investment control is generally characterized by the introduction of additional restrictions in order to ensure national security: the list of areas of activity recognized as strategic has been expanded; the number of regulatory approvals required for obtaining by foreign persons for transactions with Russian companies has been increased; increased requirements for transparency in the ownership structure of strategic companies; the consequences of violation of the law in this area are detailed. Author formulates a conclusion about the necessary conditionality of the priority of public interest over private interest by current economic and political factors. First of all, proceeding from the measures necessary and sufficient to satisfy the public interest, the state determines the nature and degree of restriction of the economic freedom of the bearers of private interest.
At the same time, by satisfying the public interest, which has as its goal the provision of national economic stability and security of the state, it ultimately ensures the satisfaction of such other interests and needs of an indefinite range of entities that are part of society and the state, which cannot be satisfied only in terms of the financial stability of the state, its military and economic security.
Milchakova O. —
Legal Consequences of Void Transactions on the Acquisition of Strategic Assets by Foreign Persons
// Legal Studies. – 2023. – ¹ 6.
– P. 10 - 19.
DOI: 10.25136/2409-7136.2023.6.40925
URL: https://en.e-notabene.ru/lr/article_40925.html
Read the article
Abstract: The article deals with some topical issues of the invalidity of transactions made for the purpose contrary to the foundations of law and order and morality. The author focuses on the consequences of the invalidity of void transactions for the acquisition by foreign investors of the assets of Russian strategic companies. The issues of application as consequences of invalidity of transactions made in violation of the legislation on foreign investments, restitution, collection of shares (shares) of a strategic company, its fixed production assets into state income are considered.
As part of the study, the author substantiates the attribution of transactions for the acquisition of strategic assets by foreign persons in violation of the law to invalid transactions burdened with the defect of the illegality of their content. The conclusion is formulated about the need to comply with an increased standard of proving the invalidity of a void transaction, corresponding to the standards used when appealing against voidable transactions. The author concludes that the measures of state coercion in the form of recovery of shares, fixed production assets of a strategic company acquired in violation of the law, are measures that are adequate and commensurate with the consequences of violation of the legislation on foreign investment in strategic sectors of the economy, which is an integral part of the foundations of the rule of law, and are predetermined by constitutionally significant goals to ensure the defense of the country, the security of citizens, society and the state.
Milchakova O. —
Deprivation of the right to carry out a strategic type of activity as a form of state coercion in case of violation of the legislation on foreign investment
// Administrative and municipal law. – 2023. – ¹ 2.
– P. 119 - 129.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0595.2023.2.40919
URL: https://en.e-notabene.ru/ammag/article_40919.html
Read the article
Abstract: The article deals with some topical issues of restricting foreign participation in strategic sectors of the economy. The analysis of measures of state coercion in case of violation of the legislation in this area is carried out on the examples of: suspension of validity and cancellation of a license to carry out a strategic type of activity; termination of agreements on granting the right to harvest (catch) aquatic biological resources; application of the consequences of the invalidity of a void transaction for the acquisition of the assets of a strategic company; deprivation of the right to vote at a general meeting of shareholders (participants) of a strategic company. Conclusions are formulated about the features of the legal form of state coercion in connection with the violation of legislation on foreign investment in strategic sectors of the economy, which include a complex combination of coercive measures characteristic of both administrative law and civil law coercion, as well as the concentration of such measures mainly in one special normative legal act, which directly defines the measures themselves, the grounds and subjects of their application, the implementation procedures. The author states that all measures of state coercion in case of violation of the legislation on foreign investments have one target orientation in the form of deprivation of the right to carry out a strategic type of activity of a foreign investor, the possibility of using which (indirectly, through a controlled Russian company) was obtained in violation of the permissive procedure established by the state.
Milchakova O. —
Administrative Procedure for Competition Protection: Definition and Stages (the Case Study of the Balkan States and Russia)
// Administrative and municipal law. – 2018. – ¹ 7.
– P. 15 - 25.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0595.2018.7.27007
URL: https://en.e-notabene.ru/ammag/article_27007.html
Read the article
Abstract: The subject of the research is the administrative procedure for competition protection in the Balkan States and Russia. The object of the research is the activity of competition protection authorities as part of administrative procedures initiated as a result of competition protection laws being violated. In her research Milchakova analyzes the definition of 'antimonopoly process' and describes stages of proceedings for competition protection, paying special attention to comparing administrative procedures applied by competition protection authorities in the Balkan States adn Russia. In the course of her research the author of the article has used methods of analysis, synthesis and generalisation being primarily based on the comparative law method. The main conclusion of the research is that administrative procedures for competition protection in the Balkan States and Russia have both similar elements (initiation of a proceeding and particular stages of consideration of a case and decision making) and essential differences (the rights of competition protection authorities to introduce protective measures and to approve of obligation to eliminate competition violations voluntary undertaken by a defendant himself or herself, unity of administrative procedures for determination of infringement and application of administrative sanctions. The author's special contribution to the topic is her definition of 'administrative process for competition protection' and stages of administrative process for competition protection. This contributes to the development of the theory of competition law.
Milchakova O. —
// Law and Politics. – 2014. – ¹ 10.
– P. 1596 - 1602.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2014.10.13088
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Law and Politics. – 2014. – ¹ 10.
– P. 1596 - 1602.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2014.10.42530
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Law and Politics. – 2014. – ¹ 5.
– P. 684 - 694.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2014.5.11851
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Law and Politics. – 2014. – ¹ 5.
– P. 684 - 694.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2014.5.42450
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Administrative and municipal law. – 2014. – ¹ 4.
– P. 367 - 374.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0595.2014.4.11462
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Politics and Society. – 2014. – ¹ 4.
– P. 434 - 444.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0684.2014.4.11726
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Law and Politics. – 2014. – ¹ 3.
– P. 326 - 336.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2014.3.11326
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Law and Politics. – 2014. – ¹ 3.
– P. 326 - 336.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2014.3.42423
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Actual problems of Russian law. – 2014. – ¹ 2.
– P. 188 - 194.
DOI: 10.7256/1994-1471.2014.2.10473
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Law and Politics. – 2014. – ¹ 2.
– P. 171 - 180.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2014.2.10872
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Politics and Society. – 2014. – ¹ 2.
– P. 220 - 230.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0684.2014.2.11019
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Law and Politics. – 2014. – ¹ 2.
– P. 171 - 180.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2014.2.42403
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// LEX RUSSICA (Russian Law). – 2014. – ¹ 1.
– P. 98 - 108.
DOI: 10.7256/1729-5920.2014.1.10272
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Administrative and municipal law. – 2014. – ¹ 1.
– P. 47 - 52.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0595.2014.1.10517
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Law and Politics. – 2013. – ¹ 12.
– P. 1694 - 1700.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2013.12.10382
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Politics and Society. – 2013. – ¹ 12.
– P. 1528 - 1536.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0684.2013.12.10446
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// Law and Politics. – 2013. – ¹ 12.
– P. 1694 - 1700.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2013.12.42381
Read the article
Milchakova O. —
// LEX RUSSICA (Russian Law). – 2013. – ¹ 1.
DOI: 10.7256/1729-5920.2013.1.6815
Read the article