Corporate Governance of Defense Industry Entities: A Paradigm Shift

In recent years, a traditional idea of corporate governance has undergone significant changes in Russian jurisprudence. Normative corporate governance models have lost their universal character and special regimes for the exercise of corporate rights have been formed in certain sectors of the country’s economy. The «pure» management models of business entities (American, European, Japanese, etc.) have also changed not because of an arbitrary mixture of effective elements (management tools) of individual models, but because of objective and situational factors of an economic, legal, geopolitical and other nature. The paper demonstrates the transformation of «corporate values» in the industrial entities in the field of the military-industrial complex, within the framework of which the share capital allows creating vertically and horizontally complex integrated structures, taking into account the interests and objectives of the State. The author focuses on functionality and significance of the directive model of managing business entities with the participation of public legal entities. The paper provides an overview of corporate disclosure regulations. The author highlights the impact of the change in the paradigms under consideration on judicial practice.

1. Gabov A. V., Laptev V. A. Pravovaya priroda i predely primeneniya neustoyki v komissionnykh pravootnosheniyakh v oblasti voenno-tekhnicheskogo sotrudnichestva // Gosudarstvo i pravo. — 2022. — № 9. — S. 75–83. — DOI: 10.31857/S102694520022202 3.

2. Gabov A. V., Laptev V. A. Resheniya pravitelstvennoy komissii po kontrolyu za osushchestvleniem inostrannykh investitsiy v Rossiyskoy Federatsii v sisteme istochnikov regulirovaniya ekonomicheskikh otnosheniy // Trudy Instituta gosudarstva i prava RAN. — 2024. — T. 19. — № 3. — S. 32–70. — DOI: 10.35427/2073-4522-2024-19-3-gabov-laptev.

3. Danielyan A. S. Fenomen smeshannykh // Izvestiya TulGU. Ekonomicheskie i yuridicheskie nauki. — 2016. — № 1–2. — S. 157–163.

4. Dvadtsat pyat let rossiyskomu aktsionernomu zakonu: problemy, zadachi, perspektivy razvitiya / T. D. Aitkulov, O. A. Belyaeva, A. V. Vyalkov [i dr.]. — M.: Statut, 2021. — 414 s.

5. Zhesterov P. V. Otvetstvennost chlenov soveta direktorov: ot ugolovnoy repressii i administrativnoy diskvalifikatsii k grazhdansko-pravovomu formatu razresheniya konfliktov // Problemy ekonomiki i yuridicheskoy praktiki. — 2016. — № 6. — 2016. — S. 294–299.

6. Kabanova I. E. Otvetstvennost publichnykh subektov za deystviya predstavitelya publichnykh interesov v organakh upravleniya korporatsiey // Grazhdanskoe pravo. — 2017. — № 1. — S. 12–14.

7. Karapetov A. G. Neustoyka kak sredstvo zashchity prav kreditora v rossiyskom i zarubezhnom prave. — M., 2006. — 286 s.

8. Trikoz E. N. Gibridnye pravovye sistemy i ikh mesto v smeshannom pravovom semeystve // Vestnik Universiteta imeni O.Е. Kutafina (MGYuA). — 2017. — № 4 (32). — S. 91–97. — DOI: 10.17803/2311-5998. 2017.32.4.091-097.

9. Tsifrovaya ekonomika: kontseptualnye osnovy pravovogo regulirovaniya biznesa v Rossii / L. V. Andreeva, D. A. Gavrin, P. E. Egorov [i dr.]. — M.: Prospekt, 2020. — 488 s. — DOI: 10.31085/9785392328604-2020-488.

10. Chucha S. Yu. Zanyatost, trud i sotsialnaya zashchita v rezhime gibridnogo pravoprimeneniya // Pravoprimenenie. — 2024. — T. 8. — № 3. — S. 44–52. — DOI: 10.52468/2542-1514.2024.8(3).44-52.

11. Laptev V., Fedin V. Legal Awareness in a Digital Society // Russian Law Journal. — 2020. — Vol. 8. — No. 1. — P. 138–157. — DOI: 10.17589/2309-8678-2020-8-1-138-157.

12.