Management Buy-Out, Cash Pooling, Up-Stream Loans and Guarantees in German Group Companies: Old Concepts – New Developments

2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (10) ◽  
pp. 1217-1232
Author(s):  
Jochen Herbst

For more than a century, the cardinal provision ensuring the preservation of the capital reserve in the registered share capital amount in a Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung (GmbH – German company with limited liability) has continued unaltered. This is the payout prohibition contained in § 30 (1) Gesetz betreffend die Gesellschaften mit beschränkter Haftung (GmbHG – German Act on Companies with Limited Liability), which the Bundesgerichtshof (BGH – German Federal Court of Justice) has identified as a “cornerstone of the GmbHG.“ In consideration of the impressive period of applicability and evident resistance of the provision against legislative encroachments, the lay person, for example a managing director of a GmbH as primary addressee of the provision, is now supposed to be able to assume that at least the fundamental legal issues concerning the provision have been sufficiently clarified through jurisprudence and legal practice in the meantime.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thorsten Nees

Football associations taking recourse to imposing penalties is not only an issue that the German Federal Court of Justice, the Bundesgerichtshof, has had to deal with repeatedly, but is also the subject of numerous articles. However, the topic has not yet been sufficiently covered by monographs. This work closes that gap in research by addressing the topic and discussing in detail the legal issues that arise when football associations impose a penalty on a spectator. The author first addresses the offences that cause liability, pointing out the need for more in-depth reflections. He then examines known problem areas (attribution of damage, limiting the value of the compensation for damages, case-by-case partition of damages and the legal practice of association courts). He also focuses on answering the question of whether the possibility of imposing a penalty is affected in cases where the penalty imposed by the football association is based on its own ineffective regulations. Considering previously expressed positions on this issue, the author presents his own solutions to it.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 775-786
Author(s):  
Anne-Sophie Zaunseder ◽  
Michelle Heblik

AbstractThis Article discusses the constitutionality of the recently implemented § 89a IIa of the German Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch—StGB) on the basis of the case 3 StR 326/16 decided by the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) on April 6, 2017. First, this Article introduces § 89a IIa of the StGB with a short summary of the events leading to the present anti-terrorist legislation in Germany and the development of the legislation over the past few decades. Second, the facts of the BGH’s case will be outlined, and an overview of the systematic structure of § 89a I, II No. 1, IIa StGB will be provided. Within this framework, the constitutionality of § 89a IIa StGB will be discussed, focusing on the prerequisite of appropriateness, with special attention paid to the requirement of reasonability and the prerequisite of legal certainty pursuant to Article 103(II) Basic Law (Grundgesetz—GG). Finally, § 89a I, II No. 1, IIa StGB will be applied to the BGH’s case after discussing the contentious legal issues regarding these doctrines. This Article concludes by discussing the BGH’s decision, which deems § 89a IIa StGB to be constitutional.


Author(s):  
Detlef Kleindiek

Mit Wirkung zum 1. November 2008 hatte der deutsche Gesetzgeber das Recht der Gesellschafterdarlehen in haftungsbeschränkten Gesellschaftsformen grundlegend reformiert. An die Stelle des früheren „Zwei-Säulen-Modells“ mit sowohl gesellschaftsrechtlich als auch insolvenzrechtlich ausgerichteten Regelungen sind ausschließlich insolvenzrechtlich konzipierte Sondervorschriften getreten. Sie begründen den Nachrang der erfassten Gesellschafterforderungen in der Insolvenz der Gesellschaft, abgesichert durch eine Haftung aus Insolvenzanfechtung für bestimmte gläubigerbenachteiligende Handlungen innerhalb abgegrenzter Fristen. Der Beitrag analysiert – im Sinne einer Zwischenbilanz – Entwicklung und Stand der Erkenntnis auf zwei zentralen Themenfeldern: dem Normzweck des neuen Rechts und den Rechtsfolgen vorinsolvenzlicher Forderungsabtretung und Anteilsübertragung. Ergänzend werden einige weitere Grundsatzentscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs zum reformierten Recht der Gesellschafterdarlehen in den Blick genommen, um erste Rechtsprechungstendenzen aufzuzeigen.With effect as of the 1st of November 2008, the German legislator has fundamentally reformed the law concerning shareholder loans in regards to limited liability companies. The former so-called “two-pillar model”, which was based on company law as well as on insolvency law regulations, has been replaced by special provisions solely regarding insolvency law. The German legislator justifies the subordination of the requirments of shareholders regarding the insolvency of the company by securing the possibility of, within a specific time period, creating a liability resulting from contesting the insolvency for certain actions that put creditors at a disadvantage. For the purposes of an interim balance, the following article analysis the development and state of knowledge on two important thematic fields: the ratio legis of the new law and the legal consequences in regards to a pre-insolvency assignment of claims and the transfer of shares. Additionally, some other fundamental decisions by the Federal Court of Justice in regards to the reformed company law based on insolvency will be looked at, in order to indicate primary jurisdiction tendencies.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Meissner

The employment law provisions of the German Company Pensions Act also apply to pension commitments for board members, unless these individuals are to be classified as “entrepreneurs”. The resulting limitations for deviating contractual agreements are controversial. The thesis examines the conditions under which board members with company shares should be excluded from the scope of the German Company Pensions Act. The author shows that the “addition solution” practiced for decades by the German Federal Court of Justice is materially wrong, and that exclusion is justified only if stricter requirements are met. The thesis further raises the question of whether it is possible to contractually deviate from the provisions of the German Company Pensions Act to the disadvantage of board members who are principally protected by this act. Considering the jurisprudence developed for this purpose, the author eventually elaborates on the legally permissible scope for such deviations.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anselm Christiansen

The applicability of employment laws for managing directors of German GmbHs (limited liability companies) is subject to a multitude of different provisions in German and European law and their corresponding jurisprudence. This dissertation examines managing directors’ protection against discrimination according to the failed section 6 of the General Act on Equal Treatment (AGG) against the background of the recent case law of the ECJ and the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH). The dissertation comments on the differences between definitions of an ‘employee’ under German and European law on the basis of a detailed analysis of the ECJ’s jurisprudence. It addresses issues resulting from conflicts between corporate and employment law which the ECJ has not resolved appropriately and evaluates them in a different manner. Furthermore, the work provides guidance on determining what constitutes an ‘employee’ according to the ECJ’s definition in practice. The author is a practising lawyer who focuses on advising foreign investors in Germany.


2021 ◽  
pp. 0003603X2199702
Author(s):  
Anne C. Witt

In a high-profile decision of February 6, 2019, the German Federal Cartel Office prohibited Facebook’s data collection policy as an abuse of dominance for infringing its users’ constitutional right to privacy. The case triggered a remarkable interinstitutional dispute between the key players in German competition law. Conflicting rulings by the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court and the German Federal Court of Justice further illustrate how deeply divided the antitrust community is on the role of competition law in regulating excessive data collection and other novel types of harm caused by dominant digital platforms. This contribution discusses the original prohibition decision, the ensuing court orders, and legislative reform proposals in the broader context of European Union and U.S. competition law.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp Heinrichs

Since the abolishment of singular admission to the higher regional courts in 2000, the judiciary has been asking itself the question whether singular admission to the Federal Court of Justice is compatible with the German Constitution and the laws of the European Union. In particular, the non-transparent selection procedure was and is the trigger of controversial discussions and the subject of legal disputes. The work questions the conformity of singular admission to the Federal Court of Justice with the German Constitution and considers the selection procedure to be without transparency, comprehensibility and rule of law.


2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas C. Fallak

Even after various decisions of the German Federal Court of Justice on the concept of illiquidity under insolvency law, the methodology of the test remains unclear. This also applies to the justiciability of business forecasts. The thesis examines whether and within what limits testing for illiquidity can be performed by digital analysis of accounting data. It also describes the extent to which short- and medium-term liquidity planning can be supported by quantitative forecasts. Statistical methods as well as approaches from the field of artificial intelligence are described.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document