Cross-border companies' mobility is issue which has been gaining public attention in Europe since the end of the 1980's. Although it is clear, from the wording of the articles 49 and 54 of the TFEU, that companies should benefit from a freedom of establishment, in practice, the scope of this freedom is quite unclear. Companies wishing to move abroad are usually facing insurmountable obstacles which are still, more than 30 years after the famous Daily Mail case, very present. The recent EU legislative activity may finally bring this problem to an end. In April 2018 the European Commission proposed new rules on cross-border mobility. By enacting the Proposal of the Directive on cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions European Commission introduced important novelties to the cross-border mobility with an aim to simplify procedures, bring legal certainty and create such a legal environment which will enable companies to operate easily on the Single Market. In this paper authors will analyse only the rules of the Proposal that apply to cross-border conversions of companies. The new Proposal on cross-border conversions seem to be an adequate tool for companies that wish to convert abroad. However, the process of conversion is far from being simple. It is a very specific, multi-layered process which involves different stakeholders and authorities and requires their coordinated action. Authors will provide for a critical overview of the proposed legal solutions with special respect to the recent ECJ decision in Polbud case, in which the ECJ reaffirm the right of companies to cross-border conversion.

Bankarska garancija na poziv (dalje: BG) u hrvatskom i poredbenim pravimajedno je od najčešćih sredstava osiguranja koje ima za cilj brzu i učinkovituisplatu novčanog iznosa iz BG-a ako druga strana ne ispuni svoju ugovornuobvezu. Ako banka izda BG, obveza banke na isplatu novčanog iznosa iz BG-a jesamostalna, a ne akcesorna. Drugim riječima, ako se ispune uvjeti iz BG-a bankaneće moći isticati prema korisniku prigovore iz temeljnoga posla. Mogućnostzloupotrebe prava na naplatu iznosa iz BG-a otvara pitanje do koje mjere trebaslijediti jedno od temeljnih načela kod BG-a „plati pa se sudi“. Stoga i ne čudi daje unatoč navedenim teorijskim koncepcijama o BG-u pred hrvatskim sudovimazamjetan trend povećanja prijedloga za određivanje privremenih mjera kod BGa,a u novijoj hrvatskoj literaturi o tome se nije sustavno raspravljalo. Slijedomnavedenoga, autorice propitkuju dopustivost određivanja privremenih mjerakod BG-a, analiziraju pretpostavke za određivanje privremenih mjera i dajuocjenu postojećega stanja dovodeći u suodnos svrhu i temeljna načela BG-a sasvrhom i pravilima Ovršnog zakona o privremenim mjerama.

In 2003 the Commission on European Contract Law (hereinafter: CECL) published the Principles of European Contract Law Part III (hereinafter: PECL III) which contained the provisions on EU set-off (hereinafter: EU model law of set-off). These are soft law provisions whose text was the result of the work of the most prominent academics from EU Member States. Considering that the Germanic, Romanic, and English set-off models coexist on the territory of the EU, the EU model law of set-off represents a reconciliation of the different private law traditions and models of set-off. During the 25 years since the adoption of the EU model law of set-off, several signifi cant changes have occurred in the EU, which relate to its set-off law directly and indirectly. The most signifi cant change is certainly the issue of Brexit and the possibility of Great Britain leaving the EU. Furthermore, it is important to note that automatic set-off was abandoned in France, which means it has replaced the Romanic set-off model with the German model. This paper starts with the context in which the European set-off rules were adopted. Then, the author identifi es the nomotechnical and practical defi ciencies in the EU model law of set-off in the context of the changed circumstances in the EU. The fi nal part of the paper presents propositions for the change of the existing EU model law of set-off, which would help overcome the identifi ed defi ciencies and gaps. Consideration is also given to the question of whether, after Brexit and the change in the French set-off rules, the provisions of the EU model law of set-off which were infl uenced by English and French set-off laws should be removed.

The idea of reforming the investor-state dispute settlement system (hereinafter: ISDS) has been simmering at the international level with the EU as the most prominent proponent of a complete reconstruction of the ISDS system, and its voice was amplified by the 2018 decision of the ECJ in the Achmea case. The EU has since called for the establishment of a standing body established by means of a multilateral legal instrument investment court (hereinafter: MIC), dedicated to the resolution of treaty-based disputes within and outside of the EU. The MIC has been presented as a matter of urgency by its proponents who claim that the substantive issues in the global investment system -investor liability, the freedom of states to regulate and the interests of third affected parties -cannot be resolved under the existing framework. This proposal was met with some degree of resistance from other parts of the world, as critics find that the MIC would fix the flaws of the existing system, but that it would perpetuate the issues and tilt the scale in favor of the states. In their view, moderate and gradual reform would suffice to remove the major flaws in the existing ISDS system.

Zadužnica je u hrvatskom pravnom sustavu prisutna već 25 godina i od svoga implementiranja 1996. godine (doduše, pod drugim nazivom, ali sa svim karakteristikama tog instituta) pa do danas, institut zadužnice doživio je niz promjena. Neke promjene treba pozdraviti, a neke čim prije izmijeniti. Iako je zadužnica vrlo brzo postala jedno od najčešćih osiguranja plaćanja u trgovačkim ugovorima zbog svoje jednostavne i lake naplate, učestale, ali neadekvatne izmjene odredbi Ovršnog zakona u pogledu instituta zadužnice dovele su do toga da ovaj institut i dalje ostaje podnormiran uz velik rizik od mogućih zlouporaba. Prvotno dobro zamišljen institut doživio je (r)evoluciju i hiperprodukciju propisa koju je teško pratiti i pravnicima koji se bave isključivo predmetnom materijom pa stoga ne čudi da ni poduzetnici često nisu svjesni rizika koji se njezinim korištenjem mogu pojaviti. Ovaj rad ima za cilj sustavno objasniti i analizirati institut zadužnice u hrvatskom pravnom sustavu od njezine implementacije do danas i dati ocjenu postojećeg stanja sa smjernicama de lege ferenda. U radu se nakon teorijskog određenja pojma i prikaza povijesnog razvoja, daje analiza zadužnice de lege lata. Navode se i neka sporna pitanja iz primjene zadužnice te se ukazuje na odgovore koje nude pravna teorija i sudska praksa u kontekstu složenih odnosa u trgovačkim ugovorima.