{"id":8864,"date":"2024-12-09T14:52:41","date_gmt":"2024-12-09T14:52:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/?p=8864"},"modified":"2024-12-09T14:54:05","modified_gmt":"2024-12-09T14:54:05","slug":"shkaqet-e-largimit-te-ortakut-nga-shpk-te-percaktuara-nga-ligjistatuti-apo-gjykata","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/shkaqet-e-largimit-te-ortakut-nga-shpk-te-percaktuara-nga-ligjistatuti-apo-gjykata\/","title":{"rendered":"Shkaqet e largimit te ortakut nga shpk, te percaktuara nga ligji, statuti apo gjykata"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h5 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>TEMA: \u201cSHKAQET E LARGIMIT T\u00cb ORTAKUT NGA SHOQ\u00cbRIA ME P\u00cbRGJEGJ\u00cbSI T\u00cb KUFIZUAR JAN\u00cb PARASHIKIME VET\u00cbM T\u00cb LIGJIT, \u00a0STATUTIT, \u00a0APO I LIHEN GJYKAT\u00cbS N\u00cb \u00c7MIM RAST PAS RASTI?\u201d<\/strong> <strong>(V\u00cbSHTRIM KRAHASIMOR ME JURISPRUDENC\u00cbN E HUAJ)<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>P\u00ebrmbajtja:<\/strong><em>1. Hyrje; 2. Shkaqet e largimit t\u00eb ortakut nga shoq\u00ebria me p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi t\u00eb kufizuar, par\u00eb n\u00eb frym\u00ebn e doktrin\u00ebs dhe jurisprudenc\u00ebs 3. <\/em><em>Konkluzione dhe rekomandime; Bibliografia<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol style=\"list-style-type:upper-roman\" class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>HYRJE<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p>Instituti i largimit t\u00eb ortakut nga shoq\u00ebria (t\u00ebrheqja me vullnetin e tij) \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb institut i cili i jep mund\u00ebsi shoq\u00ebris\u00eb dhe ortak\u00ebve q\u00eb t\u2019i japin fund marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnies&nbsp; s\u00eb&nbsp; ortak\u00ebris\u00eb&nbsp; s\u00eb&nbsp; nj\u00eb&nbsp; ortaku&nbsp; t\u00eb&nbsp; caktuar&nbsp; n\u00eb&nbsp; nj\u00eb&nbsp; SHPK. P\u00ebr her\u00eb t\u00eb par\u00eb, n\u00eb legjislacionin shqiptar ky institut \u00ebsht\u00eb parashikuar n\u00eb Kodin Tregtar t\u00eb vitit 1932, n\u00eb nenet 250 -252 \u201c<em>P\u00ebrjashtimi dhe t\u00ebrheqja e shok\u00ebvet<\/em>\u201d<a href=\"#_ftn1\" id=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> por, p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb ndryshimeve regresive ligjore t\u00eb ndodhura n\u00eb sistemin politiko-ekonimik shqiptar,pas Luft\u00ebs s\u00eb Dyt\u00eb Bot\u00ebrore, legjislacioni p\u00ebr shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb tregtare u shfuqizua. Ky institut \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb mekaniz\u00ebm i r\u00ebnd\u00ebsish\u00ebm n\u00eb interes t\u00eb shoq\u00ebrive me p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi t\u00eb kufizuara, aplikimi i t\u00eb cilit mund t\u00eb sh\u00ebrbej\u00eb pozitivisht si alternativ\u00eb n\u00eb zgjidhjen e situatave konfliktuale q\u00eb lindin&nbsp; mes&nbsp; ortak\u00ebve &nbsp;t\u00eb&nbsp; shoq\u00ebris\u00eb&nbsp; dhe&nbsp; q\u00eb&nbsp; synon&nbsp; n\u00eb&nbsp; \u201csh\u00ebrimin\u201d&nbsp; e&nbsp; gjendjeve&nbsp; t\u00eb mosmarr\u00ebveshjeve serioze n\u00eb shoq\u00ebri,duke shmangur prishjen e shoq\u00ebris\u00eb tregtare.<a href=\"#_ftn2\" id=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Nga praktika gjyq\u00ebsore ka rezultuar se termi \u201clargim i ortakut\u201d \u00ebsht\u00eb kuptuar n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb paqart\u00eb nga p\u00ebrdoruesit, duke e keqkuptuar si largim kund\u00ebr vullnetit t\u00eb tij, pra si p\u00ebrjashtim ortaku. N\u00eb vendimin Nr.8091&nbsp; dat\u00eb&nbsp; 13.10.2016 e&nbsp; Gjykat\u00ebs&nbsp; s\u00eb Rrethit&nbsp; Gjyq\u00ebsor&nbsp; Tiran\u00eb<a href=\"#_ftn3\" id=\"_ftnref3\">[3]<\/a> rezulton&nbsp; se&nbsp; padit\u00ebsi fillimisht n\u00eb padi ka k\u00ebrkuar largimin e ortakut,por nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb shkaku ligjor i padis\u00eb dhe argumentimi i saj n\u00ebnkuptonin se padit\u00ebsi \u00ebsht\u00eb duke k\u00ebrkuar p\u00ebrjashtimin e ortakut. N\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast&nbsp; rezulton&nbsp; se&nbsp; padit\u00ebsi&nbsp; ka&nbsp; b\u00ebr\u00eb sakt\u00ebsimin&nbsp; (ndryshimin)&nbsp; e&nbsp; objektit&nbsp; t\u00eb padis\u00eb,&nbsp; pa ndryshuar&nbsp; baz\u00ebn&nbsp; ligjore.&nbsp; Ky fakt mund t\u2019i adresohet dhe legjislatorit,si nj\u00eb mund\u00ebsi p\u00ebr p\u00ebrmir\u00ebsimin e terminologjis\u00eb s\u00eb k\u00ebtij instituti.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol style=\"list-style-type:upper-roman\" class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>SHKAQET E LARGIMIT T\u00cb ORTAKUT NGA SHOQ\u00cbRIA ME P\u00cbRGJEGJ\u00cbSI T\u00cb KUFIZUAR, PAR\u00cb N\u00cb FRYM\u00cbN E DOKTRIN\u00cbS DHE JURISPRUDENC\u00cbS<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p>Largimi i ortakut \u00ebsht\u00eb e drejta e k\u00ebtij t\u00eb fundit p\u00ebr t\u00eb dal\u00eb nga shoq\u00ebria, duke shfaqur nj\u00eb vullnet t\u00eb nj\u00ebansh\u00ebm. Megjithat\u00eb shfaqja e vullnetit t\u00eb nj\u00ebansh\u00ebm k\u00ebrkon nga ana tjet\u00ebr shkaqe t\u00eb ligjshme p\u00ebr largimin dhe nj\u00eb shqyrtim rigoroz t\u00eb tyre nga ana e organeve t\u00eb shoq\u00ebris\u00eb n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb q\u00eb t\u00eb arrihet nj\u00eb vendimmarrje e vlefshme nga pik\u00ebpamja ligjore<a href=\"#_ftn4\" id=\"_ftnref4\">[4]<\/a>. Largimi (t\u00ebrheqja) i ortakut \u00ebsht\u00eb parashikuar nga neni 101 i ligjit nr.9901\/2008 \u201cP\u00ebr Tregtar\u00ebt dhe Shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb Tregtare\u201d i ndryshuar , n\u00eb t\u00eb cilin jan\u00eb listuar&nbsp; dhe&nbsp; disa&nbsp; nga&nbsp; rastet&nbsp; q\u00eb&nbsp; konsiderohen&nbsp; <em>shkaqe&nbsp; t\u00eb&nbsp; arsyeshme<\/em>&nbsp; q\u00eb&nbsp; ortaku vler\u00ebson t\u00eb largohet&nbsp; nga&nbsp; nj\u00eb&nbsp; SHPK. Sipas&nbsp; k\u00ebsaj&nbsp; dispozite,ortaku&nbsp; ka&nbsp; t\u00eb drejt\u00eb&nbsp; q\u00eb&nbsp; t\u00eb largohet&nbsp; nga shoq\u00ebria:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><em>n\u00eb rast se ortak\u00ebt e tjer\u00eb ose vet\u00eb shoq\u00ebria kan\u00eb kryer veprime n\u00eb d\u00ebm t\u00eb tij;<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>n\u00eb rast se \u00ebsht\u00eb penguar t\u00eb ushtroj\u00eb t\u00eb drejtat e tij n\u00eb SHPK;<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>n\u00eb rast se organet e SHPK-s\u00eb i kan\u00eb ngarkuar detyrime t\u00eb pa arsyeshme;<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>ose p\u00ebr shkaqe t\u00eb tjera, q\u00eb e b\u00ebjn\u00eb t\u00eb pamundur vazhdimin e ortak\u00ebris\u00eb<\/em><a id=\"_ftnref5\" href=\"#_ftn5\">[5]<\/a>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Nga sa m\u00eb sip\u00ebr, konstatohet se kjo <strong><u>nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb list\u00eb sht\u00ebruese e shkaqeve t\u00eb largimit<\/u><\/strong> pasi n\u00eb k\u00ebte paragraf parashikohet q\u00eb ortaku mund t\u00eb largohet edhe p\u00ebr <em>shkaqe t\u00eb tjera<\/em> q\u00eb e b\u00ebjn\u00eb t\u00eb pamundur vazhdimin e ortak\u00ebris\u00eb. Ky parashikim ligjor, vjen n\u00eb p\u00ebrputhje t\u00eb plote me parimin baz\u00eb t\u00eb krijimit dhe funksionimit t\u00eb nj\u00eb shoq\u00ebrie tregetare si bashkim vullnetesh, i sanksionuar n\u00eb nenin 3 t\u00eb LSHT. Procesi i krijimit dhe funksionimit t\u00eb nj\u00eb shoq\u00ebrie tregtare private me m\u00eb shum\u00eb se dy ortak\u00eb, p\u00ebrb\u00ebn n\u00eb vetvete nj\u00eb kontrat\u00eb me t\u00eb drejta dhe detyrime t\u00eb p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebta, e cila lidhet me vullnetin e pal\u00ebve pjes\u00ebmarr\u00ebse n\u00eb t\u00eb. N\u00eb momentin q\u00eb ky vullnet nuk ekziston ose \u00ebsht\u00eb cenuar mir\u00ebbesimi mes ortakeve, Ligji i njeh gjithsecilit nga ortak\u00ebt, t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn p\u00ebr t\u2019u larguar nga shoq\u00ebria p\u00ebr shkaqe q\u00eb e b\u00ebjn\u00eb t\u00eb pamundur vazhdimin e ortak\u00ebris\u00eb dhe t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn p\u00ebr t\u00eb k\u00ebrkuar likuidimin e kuot\u00ebs respektive<a href=\"#_ftn6\" id=\"_ftnref6\">[6]<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>Procedura:<\/em><\/strong> N\u00eb rast se nje ortak i SHPK-s\u00eb k\u00ebrkon t\u00eb largohet nga shoq\u00ebria,ka detyrimin q\u00eb t\u00eb njoftoj\u00eb shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb me shkrim, si dhe ta njoh\u00eb shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb me shkaqet e largimit<a href=\"#_ftn7\" id=\"_ftnref7\">[7]<\/a>. Pas marrjes s\u00eb njoftimit, administratori&nbsp; i&nbsp; shoq\u00ebris\u00eb duhet&nbsp; t\u00eb&nbsp; th\u00ebrras\u00eb mbledhjen&nbsp; e&nbsp; AP menj\u00ebher\u00eb. Ky organ ka n\u00eb kompetenc\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb vendosur n\u00ebse ortakut do t&#8217;i likuidohet kuota e tij apo jo. Ky vendim merret n\u00eb var\u00ebsi t\u00eb vler\u00ebsimit t\u00eb AO, n\u00ebse shkaqet e largimit jan\u00eb apo jo t\u00eb arsyeshme<a href=\"#_ftn8\" id=\"_ftnref8\">[8]<\/a>. Sipas&nbsp; paragrafit&nbsp; 4&nbsp; t\u00eb nenit 104,&nbsp; n\u00eb&nbsp; rast&nbsp; se administratori&nbsp; refuzon&nbsp; t\u00eb mbledh\u00eb&nbsp; AP&nbsp; p\u00ebr&nbsp; t\u00eb vendosur lidhur me k\u00ebrkes\u00ebn e ortakut p\u00ebr largimin dhe likuidimin e kuot\u00ebn, ortaku ka t\u00eb drejt\u00eb q\u00eb t\u2019i drejtohet gjykat\u00ebs dhe t\u00eb k\u00ebrkoj\u00eb detyrimin e shoq\u00ebris\u00eb p\u00ebr likuidimin e kuot\u00ebs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>N\u00ebse u referohemi doktrin\u00ebs dhe legjislacioneve t\u00eb tjera, konstatojm\u00eb se n\u00eb legjislacionin e shtetit t\u00eb Delaware n\u00eb SHBA,si dhe jurisprudenc\u00ebs s\u00eb k\u00ebtij vendi,<a href=\"#_ftn9\" id=\"_ftnref9\">[9]<\/a> rezulton se largimi i ortakut nga shoq\u00ebria nuk mund t\u00eb b\u00ebhet thjesht me vullnetin e tij, n\u00eb rast se nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb parashikuar&nbsp; nga&nbsp; vet\u00eb&nbsp; marr\u00ebveshja&nbsp; e&nbsp; ortak\u00ebve,&nbsp; pra&nbsp; nga&nbsp; statuti&nbsp; i&nbsp; shoq\u00ebris\u00eb.&nbsp; Sipas&nbsp; k\u00ebtij q\u00ebndrimi,&nbsp; SHPK-ja&nbsp; \u00ebsht\u00eb&nbsp; n\u00eb&nbsp; thelb&nbsp; nj\u00eb&nbsp; krijes\u00eb q\u00eb&nbsp; buron&nbsp; nga&nbsp; kontrata&nbsp; e&nbsp; themelimit&nbsp; mes ortak\u00ebve dhe si e till\u00eb,ajo duhet t\u00eb respektohet nga t\u00eb gjith\u00eb ortak\u00ebt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Nd\u00ebrsa n\u00eb legjislacionin italian,rezulton se \u00ebsht\u00eb e parashikuar shprehimisht n\u00eb nenin 2473 prg.2&nbsp; i&nbsp; K.Civil Italian<a href=\"#_ftn10\" id=\"_ftnref10\">[10]<\/a> e&nbsp; drejta&nbsp; e&nbsp; ortakut&nbsp; p\u00ebr&nbsp; t\u2019u&nbsp; larguar&nbsp; nga&nbsp; shoq\u00ebria&nbsp; duke&nbsp; njoftuar paraprakisht shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb 180 dit\u00eb p\u00ebrpara<a href=\"#_ftn11\" id=\"_ftnref11\">[11]<\/a>. Pra sipas k\u00ebtij kodi \u00ebsht\u00eb e qart\u00eb q\u00eb vendimi i largimit \u00ebsht\u00eb e drejt\u00eb ekskluzive e ortakut dhe madje,nuk kusht\u00ebzohet kjo e drejt\u00eb as me ekzistenc\u00ebn e shkaqeve t\u00eb ligjshme,por vet\u00ebm me detyrimin p\u00ebr t\u00eb njoftuar shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb 180 dit\u00eb p\u00ebrpara. Edhe sipas doktrin\u00ebs italiane, rezulton se akti i themelimit mund t\u00eb sh\u00ebrbej\u00eb si nj\u00eb&nbsp; kuad\u00ebr&nbsp; i&nbsp; mire rregullator&nbsp; p\u00ebrsa&nbsp; i&nbsp; p\u00ebrket&nbsp; disiplinimit&nbsp; t\u00eb&nbsp; procedurave&nbsp; t\u00eb&nbsp; largimit&nbsp; t\u00eb ortakut n\u00eb nj\u00eb SHPK<a href=\"#_ftn12\" id=\"_ftnref12\">[12]<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Jurispridenca gjyqsore italiane, n\u00eb vendimin nr.04 716\/2020 t\u00eb Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb t\u00eb Kasacionit p\u00ebrcakton se \u201c<em>nga interpretimi i nenit 2437 te K.Civil italian paragrafi i tret\u00eb i<\/em><em> <\/em><em>t\u00eb cilit parashikon t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn e largimit t\u00eb ortakut, \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb rregull i deroguesh\u00ebm,<\/em><em> duke u parashikuar n\u00eb paragrafin e fundit t\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtit nen si<\/em><em> i detyruesh\u00ebm vet\u00ebm p\u00ebr rastet e largimit t\u00eb parashikuara n\u00eb paragrafin&nbsp; epar\u00eb. Duke qen\u00eb se kjo \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb dispozit\u00eb e derogueshme, ortaku nuk mund t\u00eb ankohet<\/em><em> <\/em><em>p\u00ebr shkelje n\u00ebp\u00ebrmjet nj\u00eb dispozite statutore<\/em><em> pasi nuk e p\u00ebrfshin k\u00ebt\u00eb.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Statuti i nj\u00eb shoq\u00ebrie tregtare, p\u00ebrcakton n\u00eb form\u00eb unike marr\u00ebveshjen e themelueseve t\u00eb saj p\u00ebr form\u00ebn e shoq\u00ebris\u00eb, m\u00ebnyr\u00ebn e administrimit t\u00eb saj, kapitalin dhe kontributet e ortak\u00ebve; kompetencat e administrator\u00ebve, objektin e administrimit,vendimarrjen e ortak\u00ebve. Largimi i ortakut p\u00ebrb\u00ebn nj\u00eb nga aspektet q\u00eb p\u00ebrfshihen n\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtjet potencialisht t\u00eb rregulluara n\u00eb statut, n\u00eb munges\u00eb t\u00eb tyre, hyjn\u00eb n\u00eb zbatim parashikimet ligjore sipas nenit 102 e vijues t\u00eb Ligjit \u201cP\u00ebr shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb Tregtare\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Sa i p\u00ebrket praktik\u00ebs gjyqsore shqiptare, sipas <em>Vendimit nr.488,dat\u00eb 25.11.2015 Kolegji Civil i Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb<\/em> vler\u00ebson se p\u00ebr sa i p\u00ebrket Shoq\u00ebrive me P\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi t\u00eb Kufizuar, Ligji p\u00ebr Shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb Tregtare parashikon mund\u00ebsin\u00eb e largimit (Neni 101 i LSHT-s\u00eb). N\u00eb baz\u00eb t\u00eb nenit 103 t\u00eb LSHT <strong><em>Statuti nuk mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrjashtoj\u00eb apo t\u00eb kufizoj\u00eb t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn e ortakut p\u00ebr t&#8217;u larguar nga shoq\u00ebria dhe t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn e shoq\u00ebris\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb p\u00ebrjashtuar ortakun.<\/em><\/strong> Parashikimi i nj\u00eb dispozite t\u00eb till\u00eb n\u00eb Statut, do t\u00eb ishte e pavlefshme dhe si e till\u00eb edhe e pazbatueshme nga gjykata<a href=\"#_ftn13\" id=\"_ftnref13\">[13]<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Gjithashtu me <em>vendimin nr. 152,dat\u00eb 11.05.2016<\/em>, Kolegji Civil i Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb vler\u00ebson t\u00eb theksoj\u00eb se n\u00eb interpretim t\u00eb nenit 101, t\u00eb Ligjit Nr.9901\/2008, p\u00ebrfundimi i marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnies s\u00eb ortak\u00ebris\u00eb duhet t\u00eb b\u00ebhet gjithmon\u00eb p\u00ebr shkaqe t\u00eb arsyeshme pasi \u00ebsht\u00eb parashikuar shprehimisht se shkaku duhet t\u00eb jet\u00eb i till\u00eb q\u00eb t\u00eb \u201c<em>b\u00ebj\u00eb t\u00eb papranueshme vazhdimin e ortak\u00ebris\u00eb p\u00ebr ortakun<\/em>\u201d. N\u00eb rastin n\u00eb gjykim, ka rezultuar se pala e paditur kund\u00ebr-padit\u00ebse Sokol Habilaj ka k\u00ebrkuar largimin nga shoq\u00ebria p\u00ebr nj\u00eb shkak t\u00eb&nbsp; arsyesh\u00ebm,&nbsp; si shkelja e s\u00eb drejt\u00ebs s\u00eb informimit parashikuar n\u00eb nenin 15 t\u00eb Ligjit Nr. 9901\/2008. <strong>Ky Kolegj, vler\u00ebson se e drejta e nj\u00eb ortaku p\u00ebr t\u2019u larguar nga shoq\u00ebria n\u00ebse ekziston nj\u00eb shkak i arsyesh\u00ebm q\u00eb e b\u00ebn t\u00eb papranueshme vazhdimin e ortak\u00ebris\u00eb<em>, nuk e p\u00ebrjashton <\/em>t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn p\u00ebr t`u kompensuar p\u00ebr vler\u00ebn e kuot\u00ebs t\u00eb cil\u00ebn ortaku e dor\u00ebzonme largimin e tij, n\u00eb t\u00eb kund\u00ebrt e drejta p\u00ebr t`u larguar nuk do t\u00eb kishte asnj\u00ebdobi dhe interes ekonomik p\u00ebr ortakun.<\/strong> P\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb arsye, pala e paditur kund\u00ebr-padit\u00ebse legjitimohet t`\u00ec drejtohet gjykat\u00ebs p\u00ebr likuidimin e kuot\u00ebs s\u00eb tij.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol style=\"list-style-type:upper-roman\" class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>KONKLUZIONE DHE REKOMANDIME<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p>N\u00eb kushtet kur ky ligj i ka dh\u00ebn\u00eb nj\u00eb hap\u00ebsir\u00eb t\u00eb madhe autonomis\u00eb stature dhe ve\u00e7an\u00ebrisht p\u00ebrsa u p\u00ebrket rregullimit t\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnieve mes&nbsp; ortak\u00ebve, ortak\u00ebt&nbsp; themelues&nbsp; mund&nbsp; t\u00eb aplikojn\u00eb&nbsp; dispozita&nbsp; q\u00eb disiplinojn\u00eb&nbsp; n\u00eb&nbsp; m\u00ebnyr\u00eb&nbsp; m\u00eb&nbsp; t\u00eb qart\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00ebn e largimit (daljes apo t\u00ebrheqjes nga shoq\u00ebria),qoft\u00eb p\u00ebrsa i p\u00ebrket shkaqeve t\u00eb arsyeshme qoft\u00eb p\u00ebrsa i p\u00ebrket procedur\u00ebs dhe pasojave financiare t\u00eb likuidimit t\u00eb kuot\u00ebs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Sipas nenit103\/2 t\u00eb LSHT statuti nuk mund t\u00eb kufizoj\u00eb apo t\u00eb heq\u00eb t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn ortakut p\u00ebr t\u2019u larguar dhe as AO p\u00ebr t\u00eb k\u00ebrkuar p\u00ebrjashtimin, por kjo nuk do t\u00eb thot\u00eb q\u00eb statuti t\u00eb mos ofroj\u00eb dispozita m\u00eb t\u00eb qarta p\u00ebr aplikimin e k\u00ebtyre instituteve t\u00eb r\u00ebnd\u00ebsishme n\u00eb praktik\u00eb.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>N\u00eb kushtet kur ekzistojn\u00eb disa aspekte t\u00eb paqarta lidhur procedur\u00ebn e largimit t\u00eb ortakut,do&nbsp; t\u00eb&nbsp; ishte&nbsp; e&nbsp; rekomandueshme&nbsp; p\u00ebr&nbsp; legjislatorin,q\u00eb&nbsp; t\u00eb marr\u00eb&nbsp; masa&nbsp; p\u00ebr p\u00ebrmir\u00ebsimin e formulimit&nbsp; t\u00eb&nbsp; nenit&nbsp; 101&nbsp; t\u00eb&nbsp; ligjit&nbsp; 9901\/2008, me&nbsp; q\u00ebllim&nbsp; p\u00ebrcaktimin&nbsp; m\u00eb&nbsp; t\u00eb&nbsp; qart\u00eb&nbsp; t\u00eb&nbsp; k\u00ebsaj procedure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Gjithashtu Gjykata e Lart\u00eb mund t\u00eb jap\u00eb nj\u00eb kontribut t\u00eb vyer me jurisprudenc\u00ebn e&nbsp; saj&nbsp; njehsuese,&nbsp; me&nbsp; q\u00ebllim&nbsp; unifikimin&nbsp; e&nbsp; praktikave&nbsp; t\u00eb&nbsp; ndryshme&nbsp; n\u00eb&nbsp; gjykatat&nbsp; m\u00eb t\u00eb&nbsp; ul\u00ebta lidhur me k\u00ebt\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>BIBLIOGRAFI:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Ligji Nr. 9901\/2008 \u201cP\u00ebr Tregtar\u00ebt dhe Shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb Tregtare\u201d i ndryshuar ;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Delaware Limited Liability Company Act;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Kodi Civil Italian.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Artan Hajdari, Punim Doktoratur\u00eb \u201c<em>Natyra juridike e administrimit t\u00eb shoq\u00ebrive tregtare<\/em>\u201d;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Argita Malltezi, Jonida Rystemaj dhe Armela Kromi\u00e7i, \u201c<em>Gjykatat Shqiptare mbi shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb dhe veprimtarin\u00eb Tregtare<\/em>.\u201d<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Fatri Islamaj, Punim Doktoratur\u00eb \u201c<em>Shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb me p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi t\u00eb kufizuar n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri<\/em>\u201d;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Fatri Islamaj, \u201c<em>V\u00ebshtrim krahasues i disa instituteve t\u00eb shoq\u00ebrive tregtare sipas kodit tregtar t\u00eb vitit 1932 dhe ligjit aktual P\u00ebr Tregtar\u00ebt dhe Shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb Tregtare n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri<\/em>\u201d (2020) 1 Revista Juridike Shkencore \u201cJeta Juridike\u201d;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Francesco Galgano (p\u00ebrktheu Alban Dauti dhe Artan\u00a0 Fida), <em>E Drejta Tregtare<\/em> (Botim kompakt i Luarasi University Press 2009;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Tarik J Haskins, \u201c<em>Exit Stage Left: Getting out of Your Limited Liabilitity Company<\/em>\u201d (ABA, 31 korrik 2013) .<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Vendim Nr. 6490,dat\u00eb 20.07.2016 Gjykata e Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Tiran\u00eb;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Vendim Nr. 8091 dat\u00eb 13.10.2016 e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Tiran\u00eb;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Vendim Nr. 3429,dat\u00eb 02.05.2018 Gjykata e Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Tiran\u00eb;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Vendim Nr. 479,dat\u00eb 23.10.2012 Gjykata e Apelit Tiran\u00eb;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Vendim Nr. 488,dat\u00eb 25.11.2015 Kolegji Civil i Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Vendimi Nr. 152,dat\u00eb 11.05.2016 Kolegji Civil i Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Lart\u00eb;<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" id=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> Fatri Islamaj, \u201cV\u00ebshtrim krahasues i disa instituteve t\u00eb shoq\u00ebrive tregtare sipas kodit tregtar t\u00eb vitit 1932 dhe ligjit aktual P\u00ebr Tregtar\u00ebt dhe Shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb Tregtare n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri\u201d (2020) 1 Revista Juridike Shkencore \u201cJeta Juridike\u201dfq.27-52.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" id=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Fatri Islamaj, Punim Doktoratur\u00eb \u201c<em>Shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb me p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi t\u00eb kufizuar n\u00eb Shqip\u00ebri<\/em>\u201d, fq 211.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref3\" id=\"_ftn3\">[3]<\/a> Shih vendimin Nr. 8091 dat\u00eb 13.10.2016 e Gjykat\u00ebs s\u00eb Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Tiran\u00eb.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref4\" id=\"_ftn4\">[4]<\/a> Artan Hajdari, Punim Doktoratur\u00eb \u201c<em>Natyra juridike e administrimit t\u00eb shoq\u00ebrive tregtare<\/em>\u201d,fq53.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref5\" id=\"_ftn5\">[5]<\/a> Ligji 9901\/2008 \u201cP\u00ebr Tregtar\u00ebt dhe Shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb Tregtare\u201d i ndryshuar, neni 101\/1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref6\" id=\"_ftn6\">[6]<\/a> Vendim nr.479,dat\u00eb 23.10.2012 Gjykata e Apelit Tiran\u00eb.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref7\" id=\"_ftn7\">[7]<\/a> Ligji 9901\/2008 \u201cP\u00ebr Tregtar\u00ebt dhe Shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb Tregtare\u201d i ndryshuar, neni 101\/2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref8\" id=\"_ftn8\">[8]<\/a> Ligji 9901\/2008 \u201cP\u00ebr Tregtar\u00ebt dhe Shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb Tregtare\u201d i ndryshuar, neni 101\/3.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref9\" id=\"_ftn9\">[9]<\/a>Tarik J Haskins, \u201cExit Stage Left: Getting out of Your Limited Liabilitity Company\u201d (ABA, 31 korrik 2013)&nbsp; &lt;https:\/\/www.americanbar.org\/groups\/business_la\u00eb\/publications\/blt\/2013\/07\/01_haskins\/&gt;&nbsp; aksesuar m\u00eb 10 shtator 2020. Shiko edhe Delaware Limited Liability Company Act si dhe \u00e7\u00ebshtjen Chancery Court (Delaware USA), Ross Holding &amp; Mgmt. Co. v. Advance Realty Grp LLC, (2010) WL 3448227.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref10\" id=\"_ftn10\">[10]<\/a> Regio Decreto 16 marzo 1942, n. 262, Approvazione del testo del Codice civile [1942] GU 79 i azhornuar.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref11\" id=\"_ftn11\">[11]<\/a> Galgano (n 200) fq.964.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref12\" id=\"_ftn12\">[12]<\/a> Po aty,fq.964-965.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref13\" id=\"_ftn13\">[13]<\/a> Vendim nr.3429,dat\u00eb 02.05.2018 Gjykata e Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Tiran\u00eb; Vendim nr. 6490,dat\u00eb 20.07.2016 Gjykata e Rrethit Gjyq\u00ebsor Tiran\u00eb.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>TEMA: \u201cSHKAQET E LARGIMIT T\u00cb ORTAKUT NGA SHOQ\u00cbRIA ME P\u00cbRGJEGJ\u00cbSI T\u00cb KUFIZUAR JAN\u00cb PARASHIKIME VET\u00cbM T\u00cb LIGJIT, \u00a0STATUTIT, \u00a0APO I LIHEN GJYKAT\u00cbS N\u00cb \u00c7MIM RAST PAS RASTI?\u201d (V\u00cbSHTRIM KRAHASIMOR ME JURISPRUDENC\u00cbN E HUAJ) P\u00ebrmbajtja:1. Hyrje; 2. Shkaqet e largimit t\u00eb ortakut nga shoq\u00ebria me p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi t\u00eb kufizuar, par\u00eb n\u00eb frym\u00ebn e doktrin\u00ebs dhe jurisprudenc\u00ebs 3. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":8866,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8864","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8864","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8864"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8864\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8869,"href":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8864\/revisions\/8869"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/8866"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8864"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8864"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mustafajlawfirm.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8864"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}