Syftet med denna kandidatuppsats är att beskriva gällande rätt kring om och när en konkursgäldenärs skiljeavtal binder dess konkursbo samt konsekvenserna av detta. I dagsläget är rättsområdet osäkert och enbart grundat på praxis, uppsatsen utreder därför även om lagstiftning eller annan utveckling på området är erforderlig. Det har i praxis konstaterats att en konkursgäldenärs skiljeavtal binder dess konkursbo då tvister gäller obligationsrättsliga anspråk och bevakningsförfaranden är aktuella. I praxis kan vidare konstateras att i tvister av sak- och föreningsrättslig karaktär är ett konkursbo inte bundet av konkursgäldenärs skiljeavtal. Tvister avgörs då i enlighet med konkursrättens tvistlösningsmetoder. Juridisk metod används för att beskriva gällande rätt och för att bringa klarhet i de grundläggande bestämmelserna på området används en deskriptiv metod. En problemorienterad metod används för att analysera rättsläget. Konsekvenserna av att ett konkursbo är bundet av konkursgäldenärens skiljeavtal är att en borgenär kan, genom sin skiljeklausul, komma att tillgodogöra sig mer ur konkursboets egendomsmassa än övriga borgenärer med bevakade fordringar i konkursen som inte avtalat om skiljeförfarande. Att konkursboet i obligationsrättsliga fall är bundet att tvista i ett skiljeförfarande, trots att boet inte existerat vid skiljeavtalets uppkomst, innebär att en kollision mellan offentlig- och civilrätt uppstår. Författarna anser avslutningsvis att konkursgäldenärs skiljeklausul inte ska binda dess konkursbo. De sak- och föreningsrättsliga rättsfallen är mer klara i sina argument och utveckling av rättsläget bör därför, enligt författarna, ske i samförstånd med dessa bedömningar. / The purpose of this bachelor’s thesis is to investigate current law whether if and when a bankruptcy debtor’s arbitration agreement is binding towards its bankrupt’s estate and the consequences of this. The legal position is in the current situation uncertain and is solely based on legal cases; the thesis investigates therefore whether legislation or other development within the area is required.  It has been stated through legal cases that bankruptcy debtor’s arbitration agreement is binding towards its bankruptcy estate when the conflict refers to claims on law of obligations and when monitoring procedures are in question. Case law furthermore state that the bankruptcy estate is not bound by its bankruptcy debtor’s arbitration agreement in conflicts concerning law of property and rights of association. A traditional legal method has been used in order to investigate current law and a descriptive method has been used to clarify the fundamental provisions in the area. A problem-oriented method has been used in order to analyze the legal position. The consequences of the binding effect of the arbitration agreement towards the bankruptcy’s estate is that a creditor can, through its arbitration clause, utilize more from the bankruptcy’s estate property than the rest of the creditors, whom have not agreed on an arbitration clause. That the bankruptcy’s estate is considered forced to dispute in arbitration, even though the bankruptcy’s estate did not exist when the arbitration agreement occurred, implies that an impact between public- and civil law arises. The authors consider that the bankruptcy’s debtor arbitration clause should not be binding towards its bankruptcy’s estate. The authors is of the opinion that the case law conflicts concerning law of property and rights of association are more clear in their argument’s and development of the legal position should take guidance from these legal cases.

This thesis deals with takeovers in the Czech environment according to the Insolvency Act No. 182/2006 Coll., which passed an amendment to the 1. 1. 2008. There are methods of resolving insolvency of the debtor and principles of insolvency proceedings which should be followed during the insolvency process. Work distinguishes friendly and hostile takeover. The theoretical part provides an overview of possible ways of takeover, the reasons that motivate new owners to think about a possible takeover and globally applicable defense strategies. Another theoretical starting point is consideration of the reorganization of the company, which may be conducted by both the debtor and of the creditor(s). The practical part describes the hostile takeover of SAZKA from its history, through description of the key moments of crisis to insolvency proceedings which resulted in the bankruptcy of the debtor. Subsequent hostile takeover was directed by PPF and KKCG, which bought up commitment wagers and therefore became important creditors (controlling the betting and lottery activities) and later winner of the tender for the sale of the entire company. This case is a textbook example of takeover of the company, which had fallen into financial distress. The battle for the largest lottery company in the country was very hard, long and eventually resulted in a very profitable business, which fell into the arms of a single owner.