PROBLEMS OF DELIMITATION OF POWERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE SUPERVISORY BOARD AND THE EXECUTIVE BODY OF THE BANK

Abstract

The article is devoted to the study of the issue of delimitation of powers and areas of responsibility between the supervisory board and the executive body of the Bank. There is a contradiction between the rules regarding the realization of the supervisory board management and control over bank’s management in Ukrainian legislation, management and control (supervisory) functions of the supervisory board are insufficiently differentiated, which complicates application of law and understanding the legal status of the supervisory board. In this regard, it is extremely difficult to define the responsibilities and powers of the members of the supervisory board and members of executive board in the bank, as well as to separate the responsibilities and powers of the members of the supervisory board from the responsibilities and powers of the executive board members. Law does not fully define the limits of the powers of the supervisory board and the executive board in the bank. This is due to the lack of an exhaustive list of issues on which decision-making falls within the competence of the supervisory board, and the unregulated legal status of the supervisory board. The legislator distinguishes between such concepts as "competence" and "exclusive competence" of the supervisory board. If law provides the issues related to the "exclusive competence" of the supervisory board, law does not define the list of issues related to the "competence" of the supervisory board. However, the members of the supervisory board and the executive board of the bank are responsible for the activities of the bank within their powers. Given the above, it is impossible to establish the scope of responsibility of members of the supervisory board and to differentiate the responsibilities of members of supervisory board and members of the executive board. The reason for this is the combination of the functions of the supervisory board according to the American model (when the supervisory board and the executive body are united in one body — the board of directors) and the German model (separately the supervisory board and the executive body). Despite the fact that Ukraine has chosen a two-tier corporate governance structure, which is widely used in Germany, the way to apply this structure is different. Under Ukrainian law, the supervisory board, like the executive body, is responsible for the management of the joint-stock company, which is more typical of the powers of the board of directors according to the American model. The article proposes to develop and define in the law the boundary between current management and strategic management, between management and control, as well as the legal consequences of the supervisory board’s decisions on operational activities and the procedure for delegation of powers between the bank’s bodies. It is considered correct if the competence of the supervisory board should include only control (supervisory) functions and the responsibility of the members of the supervisory board should be limited exclusively to the control over the work of the executive board.