CC BY
12УДК 342.5: 3.085
ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE LAW OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN «ON THE COMPLEX ENTREPRENEURIAL LICENSE (FRANCHISING)» (THE RESULT OF ALTERNATIVE MONITORING OF RLA)
Klimkin Sergey Ivanovich
Principal Researcher of the Center for legal monitoring at the Institute of Legislation and Legal Information
of the Republic of Kazakhstan, candidate of legal sciences, Professor; Almaty, the Republic of Kazakhstan; e-mail: sergklimkin@mail.ru
Kazbayeva Assel Gabidenovna
The head of the Center for legal monitoring at the Institute of Legislation and Legal Information of the Republic of Kazakhstan, candidate of legal sciences; Nur-Sultan, the Republic of Kazakhstan; e-mail: kazbaeva.a@zqai.kz
Abstract. The Center for legal monitoring of the Republican State Enterprise on the REM «The Institute of Legislation and Legal Information of the Republic of Kazakhstan» is conducting fundamental and applied scientific research on the topic: «Scientific support of legislative activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan».
Within the framework of this research, the issues on the development of specific proposals for ^ improving the legislation are being considered, which should contribute to the implementation of
0 the legal policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
£ Currently, the Republic of Kazakhstan is working on implementation of the Addresses of the ¡^ First President of the Republic ofKazakhstan - Elbasy N. A. Nazarbayev «Strategies-2050: a new
1 political course of the established state» and «The third modernization of Kazakhstan: global ^ competitiveness», as well as the Address of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan Kassym-i Jomart Tokayev «Kazakhstan in a new reality: time for action» dated September 1, 2020. As part f of this work, the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan is carrying out large-scale work on o the development of legislation in various areas of legal regulation.
g In order to provide legal supportfor the work of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan, >g as well as to ensure practical implementation of instructions of the Head of State and the Elbasy,
0 it is necessary to work out the issue of scientific support for legislative activity in the Republic of < Kazakhstan.
This article is devoted to the analysis of effectiveness of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated June 24, 2002 No. 330-II «On complex entrepreneurial license (franchising)» for the b presence of shortcomings, contradictions, inconsistencies, gaps, as well as the issue of expediency 5 of its operation.
q Keywords: public monitoring of regulatory legal acts, analysis of effectiveness of the law of the
1 Republic of Kazakhstan on franchising, shortcomings of complex entrepreneurial license in the ^ Republic of Kazakhstan, legal monitoring.
m
s
b X
s
^
s
X
b LU
in
«КЕШЕНД1 КЭС1ПКЕРЛ1К ЛИЦЕНЗИЯСЫ (ФРАНЧАЙЗИНГ) ТУРАЛЫ» КАЗАХСТАН РЕСПУБЛИКАСЫНЫЦ ЗАЦЫНЫЦ
ТИ1МД1Л1Г1 МЭСЕЛЕС1НЕ (НКА БАЛАМА МОНИТОРИНГ1НЩ НЭТИЖЕС!)
Сергей Иванович Климкин
Цазацстан Республикасы Зацнама жэне цуцыцтыц ацпарат институты Куцыцтыц мониторинг орталыгыныц бас гылыми щызметкерг, зац гылыми кандидаты, профессор;
Алматы ц., Цазацстан Республикасы; e-mail: sergklimkin@mail.ru Эсел Габиденкызы Казбаева
Цазацстан Республикасы Зацнама жэне цуцыцтыц ацпарат институты Куцыцтыц мониторинг орталыгыныц басшысы, зац гылыми кандидаты;
Нур-Султан цаласы, Цазацстан Республикасы; e-mail: kazbaeva.a@zqai.kz
К ВОПРОСУ ОБ ЭФФЕКТИВНОСТИ ЗАКОНА РЕСПУБЛИКИ КАЗАХСТАН «О КОМПЛЕКСНОЙ ПРЕДПРИНИМАТЕЛЬСКОЙ ЛИЦЕНЗИИ (ФРАНЧАЙЗИНГЕ)» (РЕЗУЛЬТАТ АЛЬТЕРНАТИВНОГО МОНИТОРИНГА НПА)
Климкин Сергей Иванович
Главный научный сотрудник Центра правового мониторинга Института законодательства и правовой информации Республики Казахстан, кандидат юридических наук, профессор;
г. Алматы, Республика Казахстан; e-mail: sergklimkin@mail.ru
Аннотация. «Казацстан Республикасыныц Зацнама жэне цуцыцтыц ацпарат институты» ШЖК РМК Кщыцтыц мониторинг орталыгы «Казацстан Республикасында зац жобалау цызметт гылыми цамтамасыз ету» тацырыбы бойынша ¡ргелг жэне цолданба-лы гылыми зерттеу жург1зуде.
Осы зерттеу шецбертде Казацстан Республикасыныц цуцыцтыц саясатын 1ске асы-руга ыцпал ету1 тшс зацнаманы жет1лд1ру бойынша нацты усыныстар эзгрлеу жвн1ндег1 мэселелер царалады.
Каз1рг1 уацытта Казацстан Республикасында Казацстан Республикасыныц Туцгыш Президент1 - Елбасы Н.Э. Назарбаевтыц «Стратегия-2050: цалыптасцан мемлекеттщ жаца саяси багыты» жэне «Казацстанныц Yшiншi жацгыруы: жаhандыц бэсекеге ца-бшеттшк» Жолдауларын, сондай-ац Казацстан Республикасыныц Президентi Касым- С Жомарт Тоцаевтыц 2020 жылгы 1 цыркYйектегi «Казацстан Жаца нацты ахуалда: сци- И мыл уацыты» Жолдауын шке асыру бойынша жумыстар ЖYргiзiлуде. Осы жумыс шец- И бертде Казацстан Республикасыныц Yкiметi цуцыцтыц реттеудщ эртYрлi салаларын- Т дагы зацнаманы дамыту бойынша ауцымды жумыс ЖYргiзуде.
Казацстан Республикасы Yкiметiнiц жумысына цуцыцтыц цолдау кврсету, сондай-ац А Мемлекет басшысы мен Елбасы тапсырмаларыныц iс жузтде шке асырылуын цамтама- а сыз ету мацсатында Казацстан Республикасында зац жобалау цызметт гылыми цамта- О масыз ету мэселест пысыцтау цажет. о
Бул мацала Казацстан Республикасыныц 2002 жылгы 24 маусымдагы № 330-11 «Кешен- Е дi кэсткерлт лицензия (франчайзинг) туралы» Зацыныц кемшшктердщ, цайшылыцтар- ь дыц, сэйкесЫздттердщ, олцылыцтардыц бар-жогы тургысынан тшмдштн, сондай-ац В оныц цолданылуыныц орындылыгы туралы мэселеш талдауга арналган.
ТYйiн свздер: нормативтш цуцыцтыц актшердщ цогамдыц мониторингi, Казацстан р Республикасыныц франчайзинг туралы Зацыныц тшмдштн талдау, Казацстан Республи- О касындагы кешендi кэсткерлт лицензияныц кемшiлiктерi, цуцыцтыц мониторинг. О
X
е о
"U 2 А JZ
"и
NJ
о
Казбаева Асель Габиденовна
Руководитель Центра правового мониторинга Института законодательства и правовой информации Республики Казахстан, кандидат юридических наук;
г. Нур-Султан, Республика Казахстан; e-mail: kazbaeva.a@zqai.kz
IN О IN
CL
<
<
<
Аннотация. Центром правового мониторинга РГП на ПХВ «Институт законодательства и правовой информации Республики Казахстан» проводится фундаментальное и прикладное научное исследование по теме: «Научное обеспечение законопроектной деятельности в Республике Казахстан».
В рамках данного исследования рассматриваются вопросы по выработке конкретных предложений по совершенствованию законодательства, которые должны способствовать реализации правовой политики Республики Казахстан.
В настоящее время в Республике Казахстан проводится работа по реализации посланий Первого Президента Республики Казахстан - Елбасы Н.А. Назарбаева «Стратегии-2050: новый политический курс состоявшегося государства» и «Третья модернизация Казахстана: глобальная конкурентоспособность», а также послания Президента Республики Казахстан К.-Ж. Токаева «Казахстан в новой реальности: время действий» от 1 сентября 2020 года. В рамках этой работы Правительством Республики Казахстан ведется масштабная работа над развитием законодательства в различных сферах правового регулирования.
В целях оказания правовой поддержки работы Правительства Республики Казахстан, а также обеспечения практической реализации поручений Главы Государства и Елбасы, необходимо проработать вопрос научного обеспечения законопроектной деятельности в Республике Казахстан.
Данная статья посвящена анализу эффективности Закона Республики Казахстан от 24 июня 2002 г. № 330-П «О комплексной предпринимательской лицензии (франчайзинге)» на предмет наличия недостатков, противоречий, несоответствий, пробелов, а также вопроса о целесообразности его действия.
Ключевые слова: общественный мониторинг нормативных правовых актов, анализ эффективности закона Республике Казахстан о франчайзинге, недостатки комплексной предпринимательской лицензии в Республике Казахстан, правовой мониторинг.
DOI: 10.52026/2788-5291 2021 65 2 124
Introduction. The Law of the Republic of manufacturer became available not only in
g Kazakhstan dated June 24, 2002 No. 330-II the form of traditional imports, but also as a
¿E «On complex entrepreneurial license national product, in the creation of which local
'g (franchising)» shall regulate the relations employees of the company participate.
g associated with the implementation of complex In the same year the 5-star hotel of
entrepreneurial license (franchising), determine international class - the «Rakhat Palace» Hotel
the content of complex entrepreneurial license appeared, first in Kazakhstan and Central Asia,
EE agreement and shall be aimed at the development which later became part of the international
^ and state support of franchising activities in the hotels chain of the franchise brand «Hayatt
Republic of Kazakhstan. Regency».
g The development of Kazakhstani franchising Since the mid-90s, many branded stores/
I
o
began even before the entry into force on July boutiques of fashionable clothes from
< 1, 1999 of the Civil Code of the Republic of international manufacturers were opened in
<c Kazakhstan (Special part), with the emergence the country through a franchise system. For
p of the Coca-Cola plant, opened under the example, the brand store «Adidas» can be
| sublicense of the Turkish licensor of the same noted, which appeared in Kazakhstan in the
s name trademark. The plant was built in 1994, second half of the 90s.
s thus marking the beginning of the so-called Elements of franchising were evidently
k «quality presence» of a foreign company in the present in the sales scheme of the «Seimar»
m form of opening its production in our country. company products in the late 90s of the last
Thus, the products of the famous beverage century. The company's retail outlets in the
правовой мониторинг
form of stalls and car shops were designed according to a single corporate design, with the obligatory visual presence of the company's logo and trademark. The retail outlets were rented by independent entrepreneurs who acted as both dealers and franchisees of the parent company.
In December 1999, the Ankara hotel opened its doors, now a franchisee of the InterContinental hotel chain. Also in 1999 the first point of the international chain of ice cream parlors «Baskin Robbins» was opened in Almaty under a license1.
We also note that on May 11, 2017, the Association of legal entities was registered in the form of an association «Kazakhstan Franchising Association «KAZ FRANCH», which had five members2. It is one of the nineteen founders of the Association of legal entities «National economic chamber of Kazakhstan
«the Union «Atameken», which, in turn, is the founder of the National chamber of entrepreneurs of the Republic of Kazakhstan «Atameken»3.
Even such a brief overview of emergence of franchising relations in Kazakhstan shows the need and significance of their legal regulation and their compliance with the strategic goals of the state in the matters of further development of entrepreneurship in the country.
Due to its specificity, there is hardly any reason to say that the analyzed Law directly affects the strategic goals of the state. Nevertheless, since it is directly related to entrepreneurship, the importance of franchising relations for the economy of our country should not be underestimated.
The main part. The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated June 24, 2002 No. 330-II «On complex entrepreneurial license (franchising)»4 was developed and adopted in development of the provisions of Chapter 45 «Complex entrepreneurial license (franchising)» of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Special part) dated July 1 1999 No. 4095.
At the same time, a number of its provisions duplicate the norms of the Civil Code, which
cannot be recognized as justified. Moreover, since the Law in the «hierarchical ladder» is lower than the Code, it reflects the same controversial and even erroneous provisions that Kazakhstani researchers draw attention to [1, 2, 3].
As noted, the analyzed Law was developed in development of the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, while a number of provisions on complex entrepreneurial license (franchising) were reflected in the Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 29, 2015 No. 375-V6.
So, in accordance with part two of paragraph 3 of Article 169 of the Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the prohibitions established by part one of this paragraph do not apply to vertical agreements if the share of a market entity (entities) in one of the commodity markets under consideration does not exceed twenty percent, with the exception of vertical agreements when organizing and conducting purchases of goods and tenders or agreements that are public-private partnership agreements, including concession agreements, complex entrepreneurial license (franchising).
Also, it is established by subparagraph 3) of part two of paragraph 6 of Article 169 of the Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan that control means the ability of an individual or a legal entity to directly or indirectly (through a legal entity or through several legal entities) determine the decisions made by another legal entity by one or more of the following actions: < ... > obtaining the right to determine the conditions for conducting entrepreneurial activities of market subjects or to give these market subjects mandatory instructions in accordance with a public-private partnership contract, a comprehensive entrepreneurial license (franchising), a license contract or other agreement between the rightholder (a person authorized by the rightholder) and market subjects on the organization of goods sale under a trademark or other means of individualization of the rightholder.
1 Information borrowed: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%87%D0%B0%D0%B9% D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B3_%D0%B2_%D0%9A%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B0%D1%85%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B 0%D0%BD%D0%B5
2 Certificate of a registered legal entity, branch or representative office No. 10100489861169 dated March 24, 2021.
3 Certificates of a registered legal entity, branch or representative office No. 10100488809800 and 10100488809231 (both dated March 16, 2021).
4 Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated June 24, 2002 N 330 «On complex entrepreneurial license (franchising)» // http:// adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/Z020000330_
5 Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Special Part) dated July 1, 1999 No. 409 // http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/K990000409_
6 Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 29, 2015 No. 375-V LRK // http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/ K1500000375
X
Т
(JÜ
А
о x о ь
А
сг
В
СП А
А го О го О
X
е о
"U
2 А
JZ
"и
NJ
о
IN
о
IN
CL
< z
CL
о 6 x
о
m О
tn <
< tn
ь
-Q Ш
tí q
о
X
о <
СП
X
ь
In addition, the very concept of a complex entrepreneurial license (franchising) stipulated by subparagraph 2) of Article 1 of the analyzed Law raises objections: «this is an entrepreneurial activity in which the rightholder of a complex of exclusive rights provides it for use on a reimbursable basis to another person».
In fact, this is not the case.
The concept of entrepreneurial activity is contained in paragraph 1 of Article 10 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan7 and paragraph 1 of Article 2 of the Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan: entrepreneurship is an independent, initiative activity of citizens, repatriates and legal entities aimed at obtaining net income through the use of property, production, sale of goods, performance of works, provision of services, based on the right of private property (private entrepreneurship) or on the right of economic management or operational management of a state enterprise (state entrepreneurship). Entrepreneurial activity is carried out on behalf of, at the risk and under the property responsibility of the entrepreneur.
The complex entrepreneurial license (franchising) itself is not an activity, but a permit issued (granted) by the owner of the licensed complex on the basis of a written agreement to the other party (legal user) for its use.
It should be noted that there are terminological errors in the Kazakh business practice of franchising relations. So, along with the term «franchising», the term «franchise» is often used. Indeed, in world practice, this is quite a normal phenomenon8. However, these terms are not used in the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, therefore, shortcomings are identified in subparagraphs 3), 4) of Article 1, where the terms «franchisor» and «franchisee» are used as synonyms for the terms «complex licensor» and «complex licensee», respectively.
So, according to paragraph 2-1 of Article 826 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, a franchise means the exemption of the insurer from compensation for damage that does not exceed a certain amount provided for by the insurance conditions.
Also, there are frequent cases of interpretation of the term «license» in the sense that it takes place in the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated May 16, 2014 No. 202-V «On Permits
and Notifications»9.
It is noteworthy that the previously effective Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan on January 11, 2007 No. 214-III «On Licensing»10 directly contained a provision according to which that Law did not regulate relations related to the issuance of licenses within the framework of a license agreement concluded between individuals and (or) legal entities (paragraph 2 of Article 1 of the Law).
According to subparagraph 6) of Article 1 of the current Law on permits and notifications, a license is a permit of the first category issued by the licensor to an individual or legal entity, as well as to a branch of a foreign legal entity which subject of activity is the provision of financial services, to carry out a licensed type of activity or a subspecies of a licensed type of activity associated with a high level of danger. In turn, subparagraph 15) of Article 1 of the Law on permits and notifications provides that a permit is a confirmation of the right of an individual or a legal entity, as well as a branch of a foreign legal entity, the subject of which is the provision of financial services, to carry out activities or actions (operations) carried out by licensing authorities through licensing or licensing procedures.
Thus, the «issuance (granting)» of a complex business license, which is carried out on the basis of a civil-legal contract, generates relations that are fundamentally different from administrative-legal relations with the participation of state licensing authorities.
Further, according to paragraph 1 of Article 12 of the analyzed Law, the parties to the complex business license agreement are the parties to the agreement and third parties. At the same time, under the agreement of the parties, third parties can be a licensed broker, an individual entrepreneur, banking, insurance and other organizations (paragraph 3 of Article 12 of the Law). However, the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan does not contain the concepts «party to the contract», «third parties to the contract».
The term «participant» in the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan is used in relation to obligations. So, paragraphs 1, 2 of Article 270 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan established that the participants of the obligation are the parties (the debtor and
7 Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 27, 1994 No. 268-XIII // http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/K940001000_
8 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%88%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B0
9 Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated May 16, 2014 No. 202-VLRK «On Permits and Notifications» // http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/Z1400000202
10 Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated January 11, 2007 No. 214 «On licensing». Repealed by the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated May 16, 2014 No. 202-V// http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/Z070000214_
the creditor) and third parties. The third parties are persons bound by obligations or other legal relationships with one of the parties to the obligation. Therefore, the Law allows for the obvious confusion of the concepts «contract» and «obligation».
As noted by G.A. Zhaylin, when determining third parties, one should take into account the content of Article 391 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and not deviate from its norms. The named Article of the law does not take into account the established provisions. In accordance with Article 391 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, a third party in a contract is a person in whose favor the implementation is performed under the contract in accordance with the agreement of the parties. The licensed broker, according to Article 13 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan «On complex entrepreneurial license (franchising)», acts both on its own behalf and at its own risk, and on behalf and at the risk of the licensor, licensee and other subjects of franchising relations. In the latter case, the licensed broker is clearly not the subject of franchising relationships. The usual representation will take place, and the franchising agreement will not generate independent legal consequences for the broker. The legal basis for his actions will be contracts of assignment concluded with the licensor or with the licensee. In the first case, the licensed broker is a participant, but not a third party. The legal basis for his actions shall be the contract of a commission with one or another party. That is, the broker will be a party to the franchising agreement concluded by it before transferring the rights and obligations to the licensor or licensee. The law also applies unilaterally to determining the legal status of banking, insurance and other organizations. These entities can become beneficiaries (third parties in the sense of Article 391 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan) only if there are appropriate prerequisites. In other cases, they will be the participants in accessory obligations (bank guarantee), independent obligations (contracts), if we are talking, for example, about franchising insurance. A similar situation will arise if the bank finances a complex licensee under the separate loan agreement. A lot of such options are possible [1].
The inclusion of the licensor's brand name in the license complex following the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the possibility of its transfer to the licensee for use also requires a critical assessment. In particular, Article 38 of the Civil Code of the Republic
of Kazakhstan establishes that a legal entity has its own name, which makes it possible to distinguish it from other legal entities. The name of a legal entity includes its name and an indication of its organizational-legal form. The name of a commercial organization is its brand name. The possibility of transferring the right to use a brand name shall also be allowed by other provisions of the Code (for example, Articles 125, 573, 1023).
The opinions expressed by the Kazakh authors on this issue are noteworthy. So, I.U. Zhanaydarov, speaking about the positive aspects of the franchising agreement, notes the following: «But there are also potentially negative aspects. The licensee acts in civil circulation under a false name and with other people's signs of individualization» [4].
However, in another work, he writes the opposite: «A complex licensee shall carry out its entrepreneurial activity on its own behalf. This means that the complex licensee, even when making transactions related to franchising activities, acts on its own behalf and must indicate that he is acting as a licensee, unless this clearly follows from the very context of transactions. The complex licensee has the right to use the brand name of the complex licensor only for the purpose of informing the consumer (advertising, signage, use next to the E licensor's trademark, etc.) in the manner and q way established by agreement of the complex K entrepreneurial license» [5]. o
In the Commentary to the Civil Code of the q Republic of Kazakhstan (Special part), I. U. y Zhanaidarov does not consider the problematic ^ aspects of this issue [6]. K
T.E. Kaudyrov analyzes this situation a little o more flexible, with reservations. Let us also cite g his position: «In the definition of this agreement E in Article 896 of the Civil Code of the Republic ^ of Kazakhstan, among the set of exclusive B rights transferred by the licensor to the licensee g under this agreement, the licensor's brand p name is mentioned first. This is understandable, B if we consider that the complex licensee of § all numerous rights under the franchising s< agreement is primarily interested in the right to g act in civil circulation after the conclusion of an p agreement under the licensor's name. And here > we will again turn to the question of meaning g of mandatory and additional terms of the brand k name, since the licensee does not act under the =g full brand name of the licensor, but only using ( the most significant, original part of it» [7]. — However, it seems that one should clearly 2 distinguish between the concepts of «name» 1
(«brand name») and «name» of a legal entity. The first term is broader; it includes:
- an indication to an organizational and legal form of a legal entity (this is a requirement not only of the Civil Code, but also of all legislative acts on certain forms of legal entities);
- the actual name of a legal entity;
- additional information, either required by the legislation, or determined by the founders, participants, but not contrary to the legislation.
In this regard, we assess as erroneous the situation in which the legislator provides the licensor with the opportunity to transfer the right to use its brand name in full to the licensee, including thereby indicating the organizational and legal form of the licensor, for its use in independent entrepreneurial activities by the licensee.
Such an approach is not only capable of misleading consumers of goods (works, services) sold by the licensee, but also contradicts the very concept of a legal entity provided for in Article 33 of the Civil Code, which refers to the acquisition and carrying out of property and personal non-property rights and obligations on its own behalf by a legal entity.
3 We believe that a legal entity, by virtue of 8 its essence, objectively cannot enter into civil ¡g relations not on its own behalf (the institution of ™ representation in this case cannot be considered 1 as an exception, since the rights and obligations * arise from the represented person in a transaction i made by a representative (paragraph 2 of Article
< 163 of the Civil Code).
As I.V. Amirkhanova noted, «in relation to i the Law under consideration, it must be said >s that the existing legal regime of a brand name g does not allow it to be included in the license
< complex under a franchising agreement» [2].
Therefore, the subject of the franchising
< agreement may not be the brand name of a legal k entity - the rightholder as a whole, but only its £ commercial designation, which has become tj the so - called «brand» - well-known, already o «promoted» words or phrases that may form the
0 name of the licensor or be part of it.
In addition, the error of the Law is the
1 inclusion of a patent into the set of exclusive g rights (license complex) (subparagraph 1) of k Article 1 of the Law).
Patents for inventions, utility models and ^ industrial designs shall be security documents tj and certify the priority, authorship and exclusive 00 right to an object of industrial property, that is,
they are not themselves the objects of exclusive rights.
Moreover, situations are possible when the subject of an agreement may not be the entire complex of exclusive rights belonging to the licensor, but only its individual objects. In this regard, in the Law and, accordingly, in the Civil Code, the subject of the franchising agreement should be expanded, providing for the possibility of granting the licensee also certain exclusive rights.
At the same time, subparagraph 7) of Article 1 of the analyzed Law determines that franchising activity is an entrepreneurial activity associated with the implementation of a complex entrepreneurial license agreement. However, the term «implementation of the contract» is not familiar to the law of obligations as a sub-branch of the civil law of the Republic of Kazakhstan; the exercise of rights is possible, but not a contract. In this regard, the word «implementation» is to be replaced by the word «fulfillment».
Further, the Law reveals the existence of a number of provisions that are not necessary. The examples of these shall be are:
1) Paragraph 2 of Article 3: «The legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the field of entrepreneurship applies to the subjects of franchising relations - subjects of small entrepreneurship in the part not regulated by this Law».
This circumstance seems obvious, as the indication contained in paragraph 1 of Article 3 of the Law that the subjects of franchising relations are individuals and legal entities.
2) Article 6 of the Law: «Harm caused to the subject of franchising relations as a result of issuance by state bodies of acts that do not comply with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as as a result of illegal actions (inaction) of officials of these bodies, shall be subject to compensation in accordance with the civil legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan».
This provision duplicates Article 922 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
3) Article 7 of the Law: «Control over franchising activities is carried out in accordance with the procedure established by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan». This issue is regulated by Chapter 13 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 29, 2015 No. 375-V «Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan».
4) Article 8 of the Law:
правовой мониторинг
«1. The subjects of franchising relations shall have the right to get acquainted with regulatory legal acts, court decisions and other acts related to the implementation of a complex business license (franchising) in accordance with the procedure established by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
2. State bodies and their officials that adopt normative legal acts on the state regulation of franchising relations shall be obliged to publish them in a periodical printed publication».
The specified provisions directly follow from the requirements of paragraph 4 of Article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan11, which stipulates that official publication of normative legal acts concerning the rights, freedoms and obligations of citizens is a prerequisite for their application.
The procedure for publishing regulatory legal acts is regulated by Chapter 8 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 6, 2016 No. 480-V «On Legal Acts».
In accordance with paragraphs 9, 10 of Article 19 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 377-V dated October 31, 2015, judicial acts that have entered into legal force shall be published on the court's Internet resource and may be publicly discussed subject to the restrictions established by part two of this Article and other laws. Information about appeals received by the court in civil cases pending before the court shall be made public and brought to the attention of the participants in the process by posting this information on the official Internet resource of the court.
5) Subparagraphs 3), 4) of Article 14 of the Law, according to which the complex licensor shall have the right to act as a guarantor or surety in relation to the licensee to third parties; conclude other agreements with a complex licensee, in particular, act as a lessor in relation to him.
The licensor shall have the right to exercise these powers, regardless of whether they are provided for by the analyzed Law or not, by virtue of the very principle of freedom of contract, which is one of the most important one in the civil legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and directly provided for by a number of provisions of the Civil Code:
- civil legislation is based on the recognition <...> freedom of contract <...> (paragraph 1 of Article 2);
- citizens and legal entities <... > are free
to establish their rights and obligations on the basis of an agreement and to determine any of its conditions not contradicting the legislation (paragraph 2 of Art. 2);
- citizens and legal entities shall dispose of their civil rights, including the right to protection at their discretion (paragraph 1 of Article 8);
- citizens and legal entities are free to conclude an agreement (paragraph 1 of Article 380);
- the terms of the contract shall be determined at the discretion of the parties, unless the content of the relevant condition is prescribed by the legislation (part one, paragraph 1 of Article 382).
6) Paragraph 1 of Article 17 of the Law, which fully duplicates Article 899 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
7) Article 15 of the Law, with the exception of subparagraph 3), duplicating Article 898 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
At the same time, we note that the presence of subparagraph 3) of Art. 15 of the Law is also unnecessary. Thus, it stipulates that the complex licensor shall be obliged not to disclose confidential commercial information received from the licensee.
Firstly, a franchising agreement is aimed at providing the licensee with information that constitutes a commercial secret of the licensor, but not vice versa. Secondly, commercial secrets are protected by Article 126 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
8) Article 21 of the Law, according to which accounting and financial reporting by subjects of franchising relations shall be carried out in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan on accounting and financial reporting. At the same time, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated February 28, 2007 No. 234-111 «On accounting and financial reporting»12 does not contain any special requirements in relation to franchising relations.
9) Articles 22 («State bodies, within the framework of their powers shall carry out control over compliance with the legislation on a complex entrepreneurial license (franchising)»), 23 («Persons who have violated the legislation on a complex entrepreneurial license (franchising) shall be liable in accordance with the legislative acts of the Republic Kazakhstan»), 24 («Disputes between the subjects of franchising relations shall be
11 Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, adopted at the republican referendum on August 30, 1995 // http://adilet.zan.kz/ rus/docs/K950001000_
12 Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated February 28, 2007 N 234 «On accounting and financial reporting» // http://adilet. zan.kz/rus/docs/Z070000234
X
Т
Ы А
О x о ь
А
сг
В
СП А
А
СП
О
СП
О
X
е о
"U
2 А
JZ
"и
NJ
о
resolved in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan «), only stating well-known provisions.
In addition, in accordance with subparagraph 5) of Article 14 of the Law, the complex licensor shall have the right to unilaterally terminate the contract of a complex entrepreneurial license and to recover from the complex licensee the losses incurred in case of his failure to fulfill the obligations provided for in subparagraph 5) of paragraph 2 of Article 17 of this Law.
In turn, subparagraph 5) of paragraph 2 of Article 17 of the Law establishes that, by agreement of the parties to a complex entrepreneurial license agreement, a complex licensee shall be obliged not to take actions aimed at transferring a set of exclusive rights granted under a complex entrepreneurial license agreement.
This provision poses at least two questions.
Firstly, it is obviously not clear what meaning is in it, in connection with which one has to conjecture the ideas of the developers. However, if we assume that we are talking about the possible conclusion of a sublicense agreement by a complex entrepreneurial licensee, then the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan resolves this issue in a fundamentally different way.
3 So, in accordance with paragraph 1 of 8 Article 902 of the Civil Code of the Republic ¡g of Kazakhstan, an agreement of a complex ™ entrepreneurial license may provide for the 1 licensee's right to authorize the use of all or * certain exclusive rights granted to him by other i persons on the terms agreed by him with the f licensor or specified in the agreement.
Thus, the licensee shall have the right to carry | out actions aimed at transferring a complex of >s exclusive rights to third parties, only if this is g allowed by an agreement with the licensor, that
< is, with his consent.
CL
Secondly, universal grounds for termination
< of contracts are contained in Chapter 24 of the G Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, and 5 in this regard, there is no need to highlight one
of them.
0 Other shortcomings are identified in Article § 20 of the Law, where the term «enterprise» is <3 repeatedly used. Considering that this term in b the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan s has an ambiguous nature (see, for example, | Articles 102, 119, 493, 573 of the Civil Code ^ of the Republic of Kazakhstan), as well as the
1 meaning invested in it within the framework
lid CD
of the named Article of the Law, it is advisable to replace it with the word «entity». There is also one more remark. So, it is called «Types of complex entrepreneurial license (franchising)» and provides the following «types»:
1) complex entrepreneurial license (franchising) - workplace;
2) complex entrepreneurial license (franchising) of the enterprise;
3) conversion complex entrepreneurial license (franchising);
4) multiple complex entrepreneurial license (franchising);
5) production complex entrepreneurial license (franchising);
6) commercial complex entrepreneurial license (franchising);
7) other types of complex entrepreneurial license (franchising).
It seems to us that this «specific classification» of complex entrepreneurial licenses is probably borrowed from foreign sources and is not filled with any legal content. In this case, we can only talk about the ways and forms of practical implementation (realization) by the parties of franchising relations, but not their legal component.
Moreover, the analysis showed that the Law did not find its reflection on a number of issues regulated by Chapter 45 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan: on the restrictive conditions of the contract, the liability of the licensor, sublicense, the validity of the franchising agreement. This circumstance, in combination with the above, raises a fundamental question about the expediency of existence of this Law.
Conclusion. Summarizing all of the above-mentioned, it indicates insignificant effectiveness. The indicated proposals and recommendations are aimed at further improving the legislation on franchising. Its individual shortcomings have been identified, and there is also expediency in raising the issue of repealing the analyzed Law. We believe it is correct to take measures to consolidate the norms of the analyzed Law and, for example, the Entrepreneurial Code, that is, to apply an approach in which sections of the consolidated laws on entrepreneurship, commercial activity, and so on are devoted to the regulation of franchising.
REFERENCES
1. Жайлин Г.А. Основные черты Закона Республики Казахстан «О комплексной предпринимательской лицензии (франчайзинге)» //ЮРИСТ, 2005, № 8. // https://journal.zakon. kz/203786-osnovnye-cherty-zakona-respubliki.html
2. Амирханова И.В. Аналитическая справка по Закону Республики Казахстан от 24 июня 2002 года «О комплексной предпринимательской лицензии (франчайзинге)» (по состоянию законодательства Республики Казахстан на 01.05.2006 г.) // ИС «Параграф», Институт Законодательства Республики Казахстан, 01.05.2006 г.
3. Климкин С.И. Договор франчайзинга в Гражданском кодексе Республики Казахстан // https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=30059790
4. Гражданский кодекс Республики Казахстан (Особенная часть): Комментарий / Отв. ред. М.К. Сулейменов, Ю.Г. Басин. Алматы: Жетi Жаргы, 2000. С. 501; то же: Гражданский кодекс Республики Казахстан (Особенная часть): Комментарий. Изд. 2-е / Отв. ред. М.К. Сулейменов, Ю.Г. Басин. Алматы: Жетi Жаргы, 2003. С. 545.
5. Гражданское право: Учебник для вузов (академический курс) / Отв. ред. М.К. Сулейменов, Ю.Г. Басин. Алматы: НИИ ЧПКазГЮУ, 2002. Т. II. С. 596.
6. Гражданский кодекс Республики Казахстан (Особенная часть). Комментарий (постатейный). В двух книгах. Книга 2 / Отв. ред. М.К. Сулейменов. - Алматы, 2006.
7. Каудыров Т.Е. Гражданско-правовая охрана объектов промышленной собственности: Монография. Алматы: Жетi Жаргы, 2001. С. 253. - 443 с.
REFERENCES
1. Zhaylin G.A. Osnovnyye cherty Zakona Respubliki Kazakhstan «O kompleksnoy predprinimatel 'skoy litsenzii (franchayzinge)» // YURIST, 2005, № 8;
2. Amirkhanova I.V. Analiticheskaya spravka po Zakonu Respubliki Kazakhstan ot 24 iyunya 2002 goda «O kompleksnoy predprinimatel'skoy litsenzii (franchayzinge)» (po sostoyaniyu zakonodatel 'stva Respubliki Kazakhstan na 01.05.2006 g.) //IS «Paragraf», Institut E Zakonodatel 'stva Respubliki Kazakhstan, 01.05.2006 g.; H
3. Klimkin S.I. Dogovor franchayzinga v Grazhdanskom kodekse Respubliki Kazakhstan // K https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=30059790 H
4. Grazhdanskiy kodeks Respubliki Kazakhstan (Osobennaya chast'): Kommentariy / Otv. P red. M.K. Suleymenov, YU.G. Basin. Almaty: Zheti Zhargy, 2000. S. 501; to zhe: Grazhdanskiy y kodeks Respubliki Kazakhstan (Osobennaya chast'): Kommentariy. Izd. 2-ye / Otv. red. > M.K. Suleymenov, YU.G. Basin. Almaty: Zheti Zhargy, 2003. S. 545. >
5. Grazhdanskoye pravo: Uchebnik dlya vuzov (akademicheskiy kurs) / Otv. red. H M.K. Suleymenov, YU.G. Basin. Almaty: NIICHPKazGYUU, 2002. T. II. S. 596. >
6. Grazhdanskiy kodeks Respubliki Kazakhstan (Osobennaya chast'). Kommentariy E (postateynyy). Vdvukh knigakh. Kniga 2 / Otv. red. M.K. Suleymenov. - Almaty, 2006.
7. Kaudyrov T.Ye. Grazhdansko-pravovaya okhrana ob»yektovpromyshlennoy sobstvennosti: § Monografiya. Almaty: Zheti Zhargy, 2001. S. 253.
n >
e о
"О 2 А JZ
"и
№
ю
м 6
) 2
о
Kl
