Croatia: Robbery of the century – Index reveals that steals the prebankruptcy settlements


The Law on Settlement prebankruptcy better to fit the name of the law on legal plundering of state
budget and small business owners! “Law” which is the name of its contradictory content enables an
unprecedented looting of the national budget of small businesses. Robbery is heavy 48.5 billion as
actually apply procedures or settlement of outstanding claims.
The legislator, in this case the Ministry of Finance and his Minister Slavko Linic ensure the process
prebankruptcy settlement so that neither the bodies conducting proceedings even borrower who
seeks predstečajnu settlement are not responsible for their actions! Specifically, the procedure
prebankruptcy decisions are made at three levels and the Ministry of Finance, Commercial and
Administrative Courts, and that none of these institutions do not actually does the function you
should. The way it lays down the law and the Constitution.
Linić’s prebankruptcy absolutism
For starters there is the role of the Ministry of Finance or the Ministry Linić has discretion to
someone on behalf of the state to forgive 70 percent of the debt, and someone just turn your back.
Cunningly devised provisions of the law have allowed absolutism Minister of Finance in managing
48.5 billion, which is almost five Croatian budget deficits. There are no criteria by which to determine
how the Ministry of Finance to proceed in any event. Once a key criterion for employment, once the
future potential of the company, and some solutions and procedures at prebankruptcy settlement
Taxi Cammeo or Dubrovnik companies Viam lead us to the conclusion that it is still crucial –
friendship. And political connections. And it has nothing to do with the economy, even less with the
Commercial courts as a public notary offices
Another link in the chain of robberies Prebankruptcy the Commercial Courts. In these methods, the
role of commercial courts declined to notarial duties. These courts simply recorded what was going
on, what you have declared and agreed, but by law they were “forbidden” to uncover abuses in these
A concrete example of this is prebankruptcy settlement Dalekovod he tried to blow up a judge of the
Commercial Court Mislav Kolakusic. His judgment over the High Commercial Court on the grounds
that “the trial court is not authorized to assess is it in determining the claim occurred illegality”.
Moreover, the High Commercial Court on LINIĆ Act Prebankruptcy settlements wrote this: Court
can not decide on the recognition of the claim because he has not been given such authority to the
provisions of the prebankruptcy procedure!
Steering should control , but he only confirmed !
Finally we come to the administrative courts . Specifically , they were given the authority to decide
on claims that laid the foundation for a vote on the debt write-off and that only after the merchant
validly approve the settlement ?!
The system Prebankruptcy Settlement watching him from the Ministry of Finance , Commercial and
Administrative Court seems to be a seemingly perfect system scams But lawmakers have forgotten
one little thing . ” Trifles ” is that most of the documents – evidence of illegality , published and
available on the website of FINA and will be prosecuted for several years .
In this case, Finance Minister Slavko Linic can always say that the Commercial court approved the
settlement , and the court can not say that they were not authorized to determine irregularities in
the proceedings while a borrower can say that the solution to the identified debt brings FINA and so
the circle . The robbery happened and is happening , and that no one is responsible .
But how do you actually take a robbery with absolutist law of the Ministry of Finance and the judicial
courts castrated ? That is disappearing money out of our pockets , and owners who have ruined the
company and remain on their forehead with a relatively clean balance sheet ?
The case first : Varteks
The first situation is one in which the citizens of the Republic of Croatia and the largest creditors
pursuant to the tax debts of the debtor state budget , and the borrower has not established a non-
existent receivables guarantees or fictitious loans . Ministry of Finance and the Minister of the self-
prescribed non-stipulation of conditions for release and the amount of discharge of debt , and thus
made ​​it clear to companies that debtors must negotiate directly . Thus there is a situation in which
they do not accept restructuring plans which is not scheduled write-off of tax debt , or minimal, and
the Ministry of Finance is keen to embrace plans that are illegal to write off up to 90 percent of the
tax debt ( 70 percent of all principal and interest) . The best example of this is Varteks .
Second case : TOZ Penkala and non-existing claims
The situation in which the citizens of Croatia largest creditors based on the debtor’s tax debt the
state budget , and the borrower is found non-existent receivables guarantees or fictitious loans and
gained 66 percent of votes needed . Debtor ” tycoon in Croatian way ” is powerful enough that it
is certain that no one will initiate criminal or any other proceedings and to himself through non-
existent receivables written off debts to the state , banks and small businesses and artisans . In these
situations, the Ministry still vote against the plan , and so removes the responsibility for themselves .
Such an example we could see in prebankruptcy settlement TOZ Penkala and Industrogradnja
groups .
Case three: Europa Press Holding and recapitalization
The third case is the process of acquiring property . The procedure prebankruptcyh settlement is
often used to unconstitutionally and illegally download ( acquisition of property ) companies for a
much lower price than their current value . This procedure is carried out by the so-called reduced
share capital and recapitalization in which they can participate only selected companies, sometimes
under the guise of funds and economic cooperation in joint-stock companies in which there is
majority ownership ” generally accepted tycoon ” or when a distinguished businessman wants
through its subsidiaries solve other co-owners of ” small shareholders ” . After the reduction of the
share capital of the pitiful amount , the selected contractor or fund performed so . recapitalization
of the amount of 100 million at a price of 10 kuna although the current market value of the shares
regardless of the procedure prebankruptcy settlement 40 or 60 kuna , which acquired 90 percent
ownership though , that the recapitalization process conducted by market conditions , it had to
pay 600 million kuna . Needless to mention that workers or other companies in any way I can
participate in the ” recapitalization ” – giving away valuable companies and their already contracted
with the state or county . Such a scenario is now preparing for the Europa Press Holding companies
according to which 90 percent ownership belong Hypo Bank , which will sell some of their shares of ”
respectable ” businessmen . In the third case includes Dalekovod and Nexe group .
Case four: Taxi Cammeo and business opportunity
The fourth case involved the more common situation in which the company created fictitious
conditions for predstečajnu settlement although in a very good business position , but they do not
feel stupid , thought why should not I write down at least 40 percent of its debt to its creditors .
Such is the case we had in prebankruptcy settlement Taxi Cammeo . The owner of the company I
was told that his company was not in unpromising situation but it only wanted to use it for financial
consolidation . Forgiven him a million euros .
The fifth case : They want money and time , but not a deal
The fifth case is the most common but least socially dangerous way of abuse ( approximately
5,000 , or 85 percent of all cases ) is designed in such a way that the debtors filed a petition to open
proceedings prebankruptcyh settlement without intending to spend the same . Their intention
was that fine line of duty prebankruptcy initiate proceedings against the debtor , thus they are
exempt from paying the cost of the multimillion amounts to be paid from the state budget and other
creditors , which they certainly succeeded .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *