The possibility of pursuing intellectual professions in a corporate form has always been controversial, and still is. There have been many reasons given from time to time for the negative solution: the non-traceability of the activity of intellectual professionals to the notion of economic activity, the absence of gainful purposes and many others. None of the reasons have a foundation in law and in the reality of the facts; the intellectual professional certainly carries out an economic activity in order to make a profit; the existence of the organization must be concretely ascertained but, since art. 2247 of the Italian Civil Code it does not require that the economic activity to be carried out in a company must necessarily be a business, even this alleged obstacle does not actually have consistency. The most adopted reason for denying the establishment of the company between professionals was and is that for which the exercise in corporate form of this activity would irretrievably conflict with the principle of the personality of the service set by art. 2232 of the Italian Civil Code Permission has so far been given to law firms, medical companies, engineering companies, auditing companies and pharmacy companies which, for the most restrictive opinion, would represent cases of legitimate corporate exercise of intellectual professions. To verify the compatibility between the personality of the intellectual profession and its corporate exercise, one can start from the illustration of the company regulations: the most widely used type of company is the general partnership; companies between professionals must have as their object the joint exercise of the professional activity of the partners and must have in the company name the indication of the names of the partners (or of one or more of them followed by the indication s.t.p.); the administration cannot be entrusted to a third party and the professional assignment must be performed by one or more partners; the customer can choose which of the partners must perform it; the responsibility for the obligations arising from the exercise of the professional activity rests not only on the company but also on the partners in charge of carrying out the professional mandate, or on all the partners where the client has not been notified of the names of the professionals in charge. This matter is also rapidly evolving. The recent d.l. 223/2006 seems to assume the admissibility of partnerships between professionals, also admitting inter-professional ones.
E’ sempre stata controversa, e lo è tuttora, la possibilità di svolgere in forma societaria le professioni intellettuali. Molte sono state le ragioni di volta in volta addotte per la soluzione negativa: la non riconducibilità dell’attività dei professionisti intellettuali alla nozione di attività economica, l’assenza di finalità lucrativa e molte altre. Nessuna delle ragioni ha fondamento nel diritto e nella realtà dei fatti; il professionista intellettuale svolge certamente un’attività economica al fine di trarne guadagno; la sussistenza dell’organizzazione va accertata in concreto ma, poiché l’art. 2247 c.c. non richiede che l’attività economica da esercitarsi in società debba necessariamente essere impresa, anche tale preteso ostacolo in realtà non ha consistenza. La ragione più adottata per negare il costituirsi della società tra professionisti era ed è quella per cui l’esercizio in forma societaria di tale attività configgerebbe irrimediabilmente con il principio della personalità della prestazione posto dall’art. 2232 c.c. Il permesso per ora è stato dato alle società tra avvocati, alle società di medici, alle società ingegneristiche, alle società di revisione e alle società di farmacie che, per l’opinione più restrittiva, rappresenterebbero i casi di legittimo esercizio societario delle professioni intellettuali. Per verificare la compatibilità fra personalità della professione intellettuale e il suo esercizio societario si può partire dall’illustrazione della disciplina delle società: il tipo societario più utilizzato è la società in nome collettivo; le società fra professionisti devono avere per per oggetto l’esercizio in comune dell’attività professionale dei soci e devono avere nella ragione sociale l’indicazione dei nomi dei soci (o di uno o più di essi seguita dall’indicazione s.t.p.); l’amministrazione non può essere affidata a un terzo e l’incarico professionale deve essere eseguito da uno o più soci ; il cliente può scegliere quale dei soci deve svolgerlo; la responsabilità per le obbligazioni che derivano dall’esercizio dell’attività professionale grava, oltre che sulla società, anche sui soci incaricati dello svolgimento del mandato professionale, o su tutti i soci ove al cliente non sia stato comunicato il nome dei professionisti incaricati. Anche questa materia è in rapida evoluzione. Il recente d.l. 223/2006 sembra dare per presupposta l’ammissibilità delle società di persone tra professionisti, ammettendo anche quelle interprofessionali.
Società tra professionisti
FAZZINI, FEDERICA
2019/2020
Abstract
The possibility of pursuing intellectual professions in a corporate form has always been controversial, and still is. There have been many reasons given from time to time for the negative solution: the non-traceability of the activity of intellectual professionals to the notion of economic activity, the absence of gainful purposes and many others. None of the reasons have a foundation in law and in the reality of the facts; the intellectual professional certainly carries out an economic activity in order to make a profit; the existence of the organization must be concretely ascertained but, since art. 2247 of the Italian Civil Code it does not require that the economic activity to be carried out in a company must necessarily be a business, even this alleged obstacle does not actually have consistency. The most adopted reason for denying the establishment of the company between professionals was and is that for which the exercise in corporate form of this activity would irretrievably conflict with the principle of the personality of the service set by art. 2232 of the Italian Civil Code Permission has so far been given to law firms, medical companies, engineering companies, auditing companies and pharmacy companies which, for the most restrictive opinion, would represent cases of legitimate corporate exercise of intellectual professions. To verify the compatibility between the personality of the intellectual profession and its corporate exercise, one can start from the illustration of the company regulations: the most widely used type of company is the general partnership; companies between professionals must have as their object the joint exercise of the professional activity of the partners and must have in the company name the indication of the names of the partners (or of one or more of them followed by the indication s.t.p.); the administration cannot be entrusted to a third party and the professional assignment must be performed by one or more partners; the customer can choose which of the partners must perform it; the responsibility for the obligations arising from the exercise of the professional activity rests not only on the company but also on the partners in charge of carrying out the professional mandate, or on all the partners where the client has not been notified of the names of the professionals in charge. This matter is also rapidly evolving. The recent d.l. 223/2006 seems to assume the admissibility of partnerships between professionals, also admitting inter-professional ones.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
tesi Fazzini.pdf
Open Access dal 20/02/2024
Descrizione: Le società tra professionisti
Dimensione
1.08 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.08 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in UNITESI sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12075/2020