Abstract

The glossed judgment (IV CSK 206/11) refers to an important issue related to invalidity of court proceedings with participation of a receiver in bankruptcy. It was assumed that the receiver ceases to legally exist when his licence expires, as a result of which he loses formal entitlement, and in consequence the capacity to be a party in court proceedings. The gloss criticizes the views of the Supreme Court in this respect. It has been considered that crucial for the legal position of the receiver is that he is appointed by a court decisions, and that is why the loss of licence does not affect the existence of the receiver as a party in bankruptcy proceedings. It has been explained that receiver’s capacity to be a party in court proceedings should be linked to the entity appointed as receiver (an individual, a commercial law company), while the loss of entitlement to participate in court proceedings has nothing to do with the loss of capacity to be a party in court proceedings.