?
Теории юридического лица: вопросы классификации
The classifications of theories of the legal entity presented in legal literature are investigated. Value of the theory of the legal entity as philosophical basis of interpretation of a standard design of the legal entity is defined. The separate approaches to differentiation of theories of the legal entity accepted in science are considered and their separate defects are revealed. Lack of the criteria allowing to differentiate accurately in the considered classifications theories of the legal entity is noted. As a result, the theories containing essential differences and opposite doctrinal provisions concern to the same group. The purpose on the basis of the correct application of logical reception of classification correctly is set to group foreign and domestic theories of the legal entity and by that to define possible and admissible limits of their combination at complex researches.
It is offered to classify theories of the legal entity by criterion of the attitude towards need of legal entities expressed in them for civilized law and order (criterion of a modality) and on this basis to divide them on positive and negative. On a condition of admissibility of formal recognition of legal entities as persons of law the last group of theories of the legal entity is subdivided into the theories allowing such opportunity (moderately negative or formalized), and the theories excluding it (extremely negative). Positive theories of the legal entity are differentiated concerning a question of cognoscibility of a phenomenon of the legal entity. One theories (agnostic theories or theories of personification) proceed from the reality of the legal entity assumed (fiction) which strong-willed acts are carried out by his representatives-natural persons; and others (Gnostic theories or theories of the real subject) from provability of existence of the legal entity as self-governed social personality. Theories of the legal entity are distributed on the basis of this classification. The conclusion about logical incompatibility of doctrinal provisions of the theories carried to different types within the offered classification is drawn.