Abstract

In its glossed resolution of 30 January 2015, the Supreme Court decided against admissibility of appointment of a joint irregular proxy. The position laid down in the judgments dated 18 February 1938 and 27 April 2001 was abandoned. The current view of the Supreme Court gives rise to certain reservations and cannot be accepted indisputably. The statement of the grounds for the resolution did not differentiate between mixed representation and joint irregular proxy. At the same time, the fundamental terms, such as representation, governing body or representative, were not defined. Nevertheless, the importance of the resolution for the practice of applying the regulations on proxy is not to be overrated: registration courts will undoubtedly take the SC’s position into consideration when making entries in the business register. However, the issue of previous entries concerning joint irregular proxy remains open. Contrary to the view of the Supreme Court it has been considered that those entries may not be regarded as inadmissible and stricken off ex officio.