A public sector partner (hereinafter “PSP”) may initiate its own removal from the public sector partner registry on its own initiative; this is known as a “voluntary removal.” In practice, this means that only an authorized representative of the PSP submits a request to the Public Sector Partner Register for removal from the register. (e.g., because the PSP no longer receives funds from public sources and therefore requests its voluntary removal from the Public Sector Partner Register). However, the deletion of a PVS may also occur without a request, based on the provision of incorrect, incomplete, or false information regarding the ultimate beneficiary, as provided for in Section 12 of Act No. 315/2016 Coll. on the Register of Public Sector Partners and on Amendments to Certain Acts (hereinafter referred to as the “Act on the RPVS”).
Section 12 of the Act on the Public Sector Partner Register (hereinafter “RPVS”) establishes the mechanism for verifying the accuracy and completeness of data on the ultimate beneficial owner recorded in the Public Sector Partner Register (hereinafter “RPVS”) by the registering authority – the District Court in Žilina, proceedings on a substantiated complaint, and sanctions for violations of the obligation to ensure the accuracy and completeness of data on the ultimate beneficial owner recorded in the RPVS.
Paragraph 1 of the aforementioned provision stipulates that the registering authority may carry out the aforementioned inspection either on its own initiative (ex officio) or on the basis of a so-called qualified complaint. The amendment to the RPVS Act by Act No. 241/2019 Coll., effective as of September 1, 2019, a provision was added to clearly define the point in time from which the registering authority assesses the facts of the case in proceedings concerning a qualified motion. For the sake of legal certainty, this was formally expressed in such a way that the court bases its decision on the facts as they stood at the time the proceedings on a qualified complaint commenced; thus, the subsequent rectification of the violation or the supplementation of data no longer precludes the imposition of a sanction and the discontinuation of proceedings, as was the case in the past prior to the aforementioned amendment.
An indispensable part of this type of deletion of a PVS from the RPVS is also a decision on exclusion within the meaning of Section 13a of Act No. 513/1991 Coll. Commercial Code (hereinafter the “Commercial Code”), which sets forth the conditions and consequences of a decision on exclusion.
The aforementioned deletion of the PVS from the RPVS also establishes the state’s right to withdraw from the contract and the possibility of not performing the contract without the state being in default.
Pursuant to Section 13a of the RPVS Act, if the registering authority deletes a PVS in proceedings concerning a qualified complaint or after a fine has been imposed on it pursuant to Section 13a(2) of the RPVS Act, it may not be registered in the RPVS for a period of two years from the date of its deletion. The foregoing also applies if the PVS is not registered in the RPVS as of the date the decision becomes final pursuant to Section 12(8) of the RPVS Act, i.e., if, during proceedings to verify the accuracy and completeness of data on the ultimate beneficial owner registered in the RPVS, the PVS is deleted at the request of an authorized person, the registering authority shall complete these proceedings and, based on the findings, subsequently issue a decision.
As we noted above, a voluntary deletion may also occur during proceedings concerning a qualified complaint; however, such deletion does not constitute an obstacle to the completion of proceedings regarding a qualified complaint, nor to the determination of liability and the imposition of sanctions for a violation of the law.
In addition to the deletion of a PVS from the RPVS, the RPVS Act also provides for the deletion of an authorized person from the RPVS.
The Act allows a registered authorized person to be deleted from the RPVS (e.g., due to the termination of cooperation with a public sector partner). Subsequently, a request for the deletion of the authorized person from the RPVS is filed. If the request for deletion is submitted by the authorized person themselves, the registering authority notifies the PVS, which must ensure the registration of a new authorized person and, at the same time, a new verification of the end-beneficiary’s identity within 30 days.
The RPVS Act also grants the PVS the right to replace a registered authorized person with another authorized person. Even in such cases, the PVS cannot file a request to register the change, because here too, only authorized persons are entities eligible to communicate with the registering authority. The request to register the change is therefore filed by the new authorized person.
