Preprint Article Version 1 This version is not peer-reviewed

Term and Legal Position of an Individual Enterpreneur in Republic of Serbia

Version 1 : Received: 16 March 2017 / Approved: 17 March 2017 / Online: 17 March 2017 (21:53:12 CET)

How to cite: Markovic, V.; Vicentijevic, K.; Petrovic, Z. Term and Legal Position of an Individual Enterpreneur in Republic of Serbia. Preprints 2017, 2017030143 (doi: 10.20944/preprints201703.0143.v1). Markovic, V.; Vicentijevic, K.; Petrovic, Z. Term and Legal Position of an Individual Enterpreneur in Republic of Serbia. Preprints 2017, 2017030143 (doi: 10.20944/preprints201703.0143.v1).

Abstract

An entrepreneur is a business-able physical person who performs activities to gain the profit and who is registered according to law. Starting from the national and theoretical and legal solutions and court practice from comparative law, the authors analyze the concept and the legal position of an individual entrepreneur noticing the problems and inconsistencies in legal regulations. The authors of the work make a few conclusions and suggestions: 1) terminology is not coordinated with legal terminology from comparative law. In our law, the legal term is “entrepreneur”, which is a too wide and unspecified term because in economic profession this term represents the genus term for individual and collective entrepreneurship; 2) analyze all forbidden activities for entrepreneurs, judge the reasons pro et contra and work on eliminating prohibitions and favouring legal entities; 3) set by law the bankruptcy of an individual entrepreneur i.e. the individual bankruptcy of a physical person; 4) work on passing a separate legislation in the field of the individual entrepreneurship, especially on passing and changing the laws which would regulate handicrafts (including old crafts and jobs of home industry), free professions as well as agricultural activity.

Subject Areas

entrepreneur, individual entrepreneur, sole proprietor, economic subject

Readers' Comments and Ratings (3)

Importance: How significant is the paper to the field?
Outstanding/highlight paper
100%
Significant contribution
0%
Incremental contribution
0%
No contribution
0%
Soundness of evidence/arguments presented:
Conclusions well supported
100%
Most conclusions supported (minor revision needed)
0%
Incomplete evidence (major revision needed)
0%
Hypothesis, unsupported conclusions, or proof-of-principle
0%
Comment 1
Received: 28 March 2017
Commenter: Jelena Kaljević
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: Very useful article!
+ Respond to this comment
Comment 2
Received: 5 April 2017
Commenter: Jelena Samardzic
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: Outstanding/highlight paper
Conclusions well supported
+ Respond to this comment
Comment 3
Received: 22 February 2018
Commenter: Volodymyr Shevchuk (Click to see Publons profile: )
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment: In this research, the authors performed a comparative analysis of the theoretical basis of the several legal systems, reviewed the characteristics of the legal concept of an individual entrepreneur under Serbian Law, analysed the changes introduced by the new law and offered accurate recommendations to smooth its implementation.

The Introduction was well structured and offered satisfactory background for the study, although the authors did not include the method they used in conducting the review. The purpose and the conclusion of the research paper were clear.

Special Comments to the ABSTRACT


I would recommend rewriting the abstract. The abstract is not a title, hence you may want to include the name of the country paper is related to (Serbia). Some comments include:

business-able = please rephrase, ie qualified (or capable) to do business
physical person = natural person (in legal contexts used much often that physical person)
according to law = according to the law
noticing = identifying
terminology is not coordinated with legal terminology from comparative law = please clarify, what kind of terminology is not coordinated with legal terminology from comparative law.
In our law = please specify ie in German Law, Serbian Law, or the Serbian Legal System

Special Comments to the ARTICLE


the body of the article requires some additional revision including but not limited to:

- is very important in our legal system = it would be better not to use the word OUR but to clarify ie the Serbian Legal System
- I would suggest you combine the first three paragraphs on page 3
- entering in the register = please clarify, or rephrase
- Each legal entity has one property and it is, by rule, inseparable from him = inseparable from it (or the legal entity)
- our legal system did not consistently carryout the principle of the property oneness of and entrepreneur = you may want to restructure the sentence to improve clarity
- I would suggest you combine the first two paragraphs on page 14

Additional comment:


- the authors may want to avoid using passive language and use active tense
+ Respond to this comment
Leave a public comment
Send a private comment to the author(s)
Rate this article
Views 0
Downloads 0
Comments 3
Metrics 0
Leave a public comment

×
Alerts
Notify me about updates to this article or when a peer-reviewed version is published.