Is there a significant procedural violation in the appointment of the Competition Commission at the Supreme Court? This question is asked by many judges, participants in the procedure for selecting judges in the Commercial College of the Courts of Appeal. What is it about? Everything boils down to the presence of an absolute and substantial procedural violation in the selection of a member of the competition commission. It is about Associate Professor Dr. Vencislav Petrov, who does NOT have a scientific specialty in commercial law.
Since this is the case, is there an illegal composition of the competition committee? The participant, Assoc. Dr. Ventsislav Petrov, does not have a scientific specialty in commercial law and does not have a habilitation in this scientific discipline. Who didn't know that, or it was just conveniently left out...
According to generally available public information, he is a specialist only in family and inheritance law and can only evaluate candidates for promotion in civil law. Associate Professor Dr. Vencislav Petrov has never taught commercial law, nor has he written publications on commercial law.
And if we look at Art. 189, para. 5 of the Civil Code, there is an imperative requirement that the competition commission appoint a habilitated scholar of legal sciences in the relevant subject, who has the academic position of docent or professor.
Assoc. Dr. Ventsislav Petrov is a qualified scholar of legal sciences with the academic position of associate professor, but not in the relevant subject - commercial law, but in civil law.
By the same logic why then the other members – judges in the competition commission, are they not from the Civil College of the Supreme Court, but from the Commercial College?