The Vale Decision and the Court’s Case Law on the Nationality of Companies

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesper Lau Hansen
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Unfinished Business ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Court Of Justice

In its decision in Vale, the Court of Justice takes another step forward, while still respecting its two-pronged case law on the nationality of companies. Analysing this case law shows a considerable move towards a genuine freedom of establishment for companies and paints a more nuanced picture than is normally acknowledged. However, the necessary legal certainty so paramount for business in these matters still requires actual legislation. In this respect, the question of establishment and the freedom of companies to choose their nationality remain unfinished business.

Recent Golden Share Cases in the Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1099-1130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamás Szabados
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Member States ◽  
Golden Share ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Special Rights ◽  
Free Movement Of Capital

AbstractIn several golden share cases, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “Court”) condemned Member States for reserving certain special rights in privatized companies for themselves. In spite of the Court's consistently strict approach in the golden share cases, the more recent golden share judgments demonstrate that the Court's practice is not free from uncertainties. In its case law, the Court seems to hesitate between the application of the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital. Additionally, it is not entirely clear which measures are caught by provisions on the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital.

English Worldwide Freezing Orders in Europe

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 250-274
Author(s):  
Pontian N. Okoli
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Member State ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Judicial Discretion ◽  
Mutual Trust ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Court Of Justice

A judgment creditor who obtains a freezing order in one EU Member State may seek to enforce it in another Member State. When judgment creditors seek to enforce such orders, the judgment debtors may appeal against the enforcement orders. This article examines how protective measures can be guaranteed pending such enforcement appeals under the Brussels legal regime. Relevant legal provisions and the case law of the Court of Justice are considered. There is also an examination of the recent English response to the Brussels legal regime and an argument that the judgment creditor is entitled to protective measures. Drawing support from public policy and mutual trust considerations, this article concludes that exercising judicial discretion in granting protective measures pending appeals undermines legal certainty.

Minderheitsschutz im Personengesellschaftsrecht

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Björn Staudinger
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
Regulatory Framework ◽  
Majority Voting ◽  
Careful Examination ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Fiduciary Duties ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Federal Court Of Justice

This study deals with the changing case law on the control of majority voting in German partnership law. It examines the consequences of the German Federal Court of Justice abandoning the so-called ‘Bestimmtheitsgrundsatz’ (the principle of legal certainty) and how to deal with the ongoing legal uncertainty regarding the existence of the so-called ‘Kernbereichslehre’ (the principle on protecting minorities in corporations). To answer this question, the author examines how majority voting can be controlled within the existing regulatory framework. In this context, after careful examination of previous case law, he argues that the ‘Kernbereichslehre’ should be abandoned and replaced by already existing legal principles, such as fiduciary duties.

scholarly journals The Application of International Law in the Court of Justice of the European Union: Proportionality Rising

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 557-592
Author(s):  
Rupert Dunbar
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
External Relations ◽  
Frequent Absence

AbstractApplication of international treaty and customary international law at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is increasingly recognized by scholars as problematic regarding legal certainty. This Article seeks to illustrate why this is and to propose reform. Through comparing judicial approaches in the application of international law at the CJEU to its approach in internal case law, it is argued that in the frequent absence of proportionality in external case law the Court has utilized, redeployed, or varied other judicial devices in an effort to retain the discretion which proportionality affords. These are argued to effect legal certainty and established concepts of justice within the EU legal system. Accordingly, it is submitted that proportionality should be transplanted fully and openly to external relations case law and that support for this can be extrapolated from existing literature.

scholarly journals Cross-Border Conversions in the European Union After the Polbud Case

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-77
Author(s):  
Iryna Basova
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Member States ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
A Company ◽  
Legislative Measures

Cross-border conversions may be considered as an achievement of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU, Court) since its case law paves the way towards acceptance of such cross-border operations in all Member States. In the Polbud case, the CJEU clarified the scope of the freedom of establishment in regard to cross-border conversions. That judgement should give an impulse to those Member States whose law remains silent on the issue, lacks regulation or is not in line with the provisions on the freedom of establishment, to take appropriate legislative measures. However, a creation of a legal framework at the European level is still needed to provide a commonly-accepted procedure for such operations, to secure protection for vulnerable constituencies of a company, to prevent abusive practices and to regulate cooperation between the states which are involved in cross-border conversions.

scholarly journals Steigimosi laisvė po Cartesio bylos: ES inkorporavimo doktrinos trūkumas ir to padariniai

Teisė ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 75 ◽  
pp. 143-158
Author(s):  
Robertas Čiočys
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Real Seat

This article defines private international law doctrines of incorporation and real seat and then turns to the analysis of freedom of establishment guaranteed by the EC Treaty. The article analyses judgments of the European Court of Justice, interpreting the freedom of establishment in cases where companies tried to transfer their seats across frontiers, especially in light of the newest judgment in this area in the Cartesio case. The analysis of case law shows the link between the freedom of establishment and private international law doctrines. The article is concluded by a discussion of opportunities that free­dom of establishment provides for companies, alternatives for cross-border business restructurings and implications of rising number of these activities. Straipsnyje apibūdinamos tarptautinės privatinės teisės taikomos inkorporavimo ir buveinės doktri­nos ir tada analizuojama EB steigimo sutarties garantuojama steigimosi laisvė. Aptariama Europos Tei­singumo Teismo praktika interpretuojant steigimosi laisvę bylose, kai bendrovės bandė perkelti buveinę už valstybės ribų. Atsižvelgiant į tai, kaip supratimą keičia naujausia byla šioje srityje − Cartesio. Teis­mo praktikos analizė parodo steigimosi laisvės ir tarptautinės privatinės teisės doktrinų ryšį. Straipsnis baigiamas aptariant galimybes, kurias bendrovėms suteikia steigimosi laisvė, ir alternatyvas, kuriomis jos gali pasinaudoti, siekdamos pertvarkyti verslą, kai tai apima kelias valstybes, bei šio reiškinio dažnė­jimo padarinius.

Res Judicata in the Court of Justice Case-Law

2007 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 385-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xavier Groussot ◽  
Timo Minssen
Keyword(s):  
Indirect Effect ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Res Judicata ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Procedural Autonomy ◽  
State Liability

Forms of res judicata – Unwritten principle of EU law – National procedural autonomy v. EC supremacy – Revision of decisions v. state liability – Finality of administrative decisions v. judicial decisions – Higher respect for judicial decisions than for administrative decisions – Res judicata not absolute – ECJ itself under demands of legal certainty – Analogy between res judicata rules and rules of direct and indirect effect.

scholarly journals The transfer of the company’s registered office

2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 449-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saša Prelič ◽  
Jerneja Prostor
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Legal Form ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Registered Office ◽  
Real Seat ◽  
The Cross ◽  
The Eu

In the light of the relevant case law of The Court of Justice of the EU it is emphasized that the cross-border transfer of company’s registered office (and its real seat) must be permitted in accordance with the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. Nevertheless, the Fourteenth Company law Directive should be adopted for the reasons of legal certainty and it should determine, whether the transfer of the registered office (without transfer of company’s real seat) to another Member State is admissible or not. Furthermore, the authors discuss the cross-border restructuring of the company, which in addition to relocation of the registered office also includes a change of its legal form. The Court of Justice of the EU has not yet decided on such cross-border restructuring, nevertheless it should be allowed based of the freedom of establishment (cross-border formal transformation).

Turn of the Tide?: The “Golden Share” Judgements of the European Court of Justice and the Liberalization of the European Capital Markets

2002 ◽  
Vol 3 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Adolff
Keyword(s):  
Central Element ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Community Institutions ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Treaty Of Rome

There is hardly a set of legal institutions that has more contributed to the creation of the common market than the fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Treaty of Rome. The expanding concepts of freedom of establishment and of free movement of goods, persons, services and capital have, during the thirty years since the European Court of Justice\'s (ECJ) decision in \”Dassonville\”, by far become the Community\'s most effective deregulatory instruments. The driving force behind this development has been the case law of the Court. This case law has, on an initially slim basis in the Treaty, established the fundamental freedoms as the central element of a \“new legal order\” which has direct effect, results in the automatic inapplicability of incompatible national law and which can be invoked by every citizen in national administrative or judicial proceedings. Furthermore, it is enforced not only by Community institutions but also by EU-citizens acting as \“private public attorneys\” when bringing claims under European law against Member States for damages resulting from violations of the Treaty.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document