A post by guest blogger Louis Coussée
The assignment of a claim is an important legal instrument for the financial market. It enables both simple transfers of claims from one person to another and complex financial operations used to finance the business activity of firms, such as financial collateral arrangements, factoring and securitization. Furthermore, it enables the availability of capital and credit across borders and allows small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to obtain credit at affordable rates. In a globalizing context, such cross-border transactions are a daily routine.
Substantively, there exists no harmonization in the field of the assignment of a claim on EU-level. The question which law is applicable to the assignment of a claim, therefore, can have a huge impact on the outcome of a dispute, when national jurisdictions apply different rules to make an assignment effective against third parties. The Rome-I Regulation contains a provision on the applicable law to the assignment of a claim. However, art. 14 of the Rome-I Regulation does not provide an answer to the most important question, i.e. which law governs the effectiveness of an assignment against third parties. This question is widely discussed and the topic of choice-of-law rules for the assignment of claims in financial services and markets is considered to be one of the most complicated, challenging and arcane. Continue reading “A uniform European regulation on the law applicable to the effectiveness of a cross-border assignment of a claim: no longer the elephant in the room?”
De obligatielening neemt een belangrijke plaats in, in de financiering van (Belgische) ondernemingen. Veertig jaar (en een aantal financiële crisissen) na de publicatie van het standaardwerk van Van Hille, Aandelen en obligaties in het Belgische recht, ligt een nieuw standaardwerk voor, geschreven door een schare auteurs o.l.v. Diederik Bruloot en Kristof Maresceau (UGent). Continue reading “De obligatielening”
In de financiering van ondernemingen neemt de achtergestelde schuldvordering een belangrijke plaats in, tussen kapitaal en schuld. In zijn recent gepubliceerde proefschrift heeft Roel Fransis (KUL) de achtergestelde schuldvordering aan een minitieus onderzoek onderworpen, zowel wat de juridische aard van deze rechtsfiguur betreft als de rechtsgevolgen ervan, in het bijzonder in het kader van insolventieprocedures. Met dit proefschrift heeft Roel Fransis, in de woorden van zijn promotor (Eric Dirix, KUL), “een fundamenteel werk afgeleverd dat onze kennis op vele terreinen van het verbintenissen-, goederenrecht en insolventierecht werkelijk vooruit helpt en dat tevens voor de rechtspraktijk van onschatbare waarde zal blijken te zijn”. Met deze beoordeling kan alleen maar ingestemd worden.
In a recent paper Danielle D’Onfro (Washington University Law) argues that security interests are best understood as a form of “limited liability property”. Limited liability, i.e. the privilege of being legally shielded from liability that would normally apply, has long been considered the quintessential feature of equity interests. The author convincingly argues, however, that limited liability is a critical feature of security interests as well. Debt and equity are indeed not the opposites they are sometimes believed to be. The paper will soon be published in Cardozo Law Review and can already be consulted here.
One of the very first posts on this blog related to the publication of the inaugural lecture of prof. dr. Rolef de Weijs on the occasion of his appointment as professor of National and International Insolvency Law at the University of Amsterdam’s (UvA) Faculty of Law. In this lecture, the position of shareholders in insolvency law is critically examined. Until recently, insolvency was all about creditors (company law, on the other hand, was all about shareholders). The lecture by prof. de Weijs clearly demonstrates the need for insolvency law to also take into account the position of shareholders. Debt and equity go hand in hand, also – and especially – in times of insolvency. On a more general level, the lecture illustrates the absence of real borders between company law and insolvency law. An (updated) English translation of the lecture can now be found here.
A post by guest blogger Nicolaes W.A. Tollenaar
Legislation is currently being prepared, at both the European and the national levels, to introduce proceedings that aim to rescue ailing businesses before formal insolvency proceedings are begun. Such proceedings are commonly referred to as “pre-insolvency” proceedings. They provide for the right, outside formal insolvency proceedings, to propose a restructuring plan to creditors and other capital providers that, under certain circumstances, can be imposed upon opposing parties.
On 22 November 2016, as part of the Action Plan for a Capital Markets Union, the EC published a draft directive on preventive restructuring frameworks which, upon adoption, will compel the Member States to introduce pre-insolvency proceedings into their national systems. At the same time, the Dutch Government is working on a draft of the Continuity of Enterprises Act (Voorontwerp Wet Continuïteit Onderneming II), which seeks to introduce pre-insolvency proceedings in the Netherlands.
Dr. Nicolaes Tollenaar has kindly provided us with the following summary of his recent research regarding the normative foundation and framework of such pre-insolvency proceedings.
Continue reading “Pre-insolvency proceedings, normative foundation and framework”
This week the (already) third edition of the influential book The Anatomy of Corporate Law was published by Oxford University Press. The book provides the reader with a solid framework to understand corporate law from a comparative perspective. The following key jurisdictions are covered: US, UK, Brazil, Italy, France, Germany, and Japan. The general structure of the previous editions is maintained. The quality of the authors guarantees the quality of the work.
Continue reading “The Anatomy of Corporate Law”