The AkzoNobel Case: An Activist Shareholder’s Battle against the Backdrop of the Shareholder Rights Directive

Article in European Company Law

In two earlier blogposts on this blog (here and here), I commented (together with Thom Wetzer for the first post) on the two recent decisions of the Dutch courts in the AkzoNobel case. In a recently published article in the journal “European Company Law”, I further develop my arguments about this case. Continue reading “The AkzoNobel Case: An Activist Shareholder’s Battle against the Backdrop of the Shareholder Rights Directive”

Insolventierecht in beweging – studieavond UA

Naar jaarlijkste traditie organiseren de studenten van de grondige studie insolventierecht (UA) opnieuw een studieavond, onder begeleiding van prof. Melissa Vanmeenen. Op de tiende (feest)editie van deze studieavond worden de belangrijkste evoluties die het (grensoverschrijdende) insolventierecht het voorbije decennium heeft ondergaan zorgvuldig besproken en in verband gebracht met het nieuwe boek XX WER, dat in 2018 in werking treedt. De blik wordt zowel op het verleden als op de toekomst van het insolventierecht gericht.   Continue reading “Insolventierecht in beweging – studieavond UA”

Brexit and EU rules on company law

A Notice to Stakeholders was recently published on the website of the European Commission, DG Justice and Consumers, regarding legal repercussions which need to considered (if and) when the United Kingdom becomes a third country.

As of the withdrawal date, UK incorporated companies will be(come) third country companies and therefore not automatically be recognised under Article 54 TFEU by the Member States. They may, however, be recognised in accordance with each Member State’s national law (private international law rules concerning companies and the subsequently applicable substantive company law), or international law treaties. Continue reading “Brexit and EU rules on company law”

Kwantitatieve aansprakelijkheidsbeperking voor bestuurders in Delaware (en België?)

Voorontwerp WVV komt met maximumaansprakelijkheid voor bestuurders van rechtspersonen

In de recente gepubliceerde slides van het Belgisch Centrum voor Vennootschapsrecht m.b.t. het Voorontwerp van het Wetboek “Vennootschappen en Verenigingen” wordt de invoering van een kwantitatieve aansprakelijkheidsbeperking ten voordele van bestuurders van rechtspersonen besproken. Het Voorontwerp maakt ter zake geen onderscheid tussen feitelijke bestuurders en formeel benoemde bestuurders.

Het bekendste voorbeeld van de (overigens zeldzame) buitenlandse rechtstelsels die een gelijkaardige aansprakelijkheidsbeperking heeft ingevoerd, is Section 102(b)(7) of the Delaware General Corporation Law : Continue reading “Kwantitatieve aansprakelijkheidsbeperking voor bestuurders in Delaware (en België?)”

Vis attractiva concursus and its limits

In its judgment of 9 November 2017, the Court of Justice has limited the principle of vis attractiva concursus, i.e. the principle that ancillary proceedings may be attracted to, and brought before, the forum concursus. The Court ruled that article 3(1) of the (old) Insolvency Regulation must be interpreted as meaning that an action for damages for unfair competition by which the assignee of part of the business acquired in the course of insolvency proceedings is accused of misrepresenting itself as being the exclusive distributor of articles manufactured by the debtor does not fall within the jurisdiction of the court which opened the insolvency proceedings. Continue reading “Vis attractiva concursus and its limits”

The principle of limited liability. A reminder on Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd

In Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd, the House of Lords famously upheld the principle that creditors of an insolvent company cannot sue the company’s shareholders for any of the company’s outstanding debts. In the words of Lord Herschell: Continue reading “The principle of limited liability. A reminder on Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd”

Free Choice of Company Law: Another Brick Out of the Wall

CJEU holds freedom of establishment does not require pursuit of genuine economic activity

In yesterday’s preliminary ruling in C-106/16 Polbud, the CJEU held that freedom of establishment is applicable to the transfer of the registered office of a company: (1) formed in accordance with the law of one Member State, (2) to the territory of another Member State, for the purposes of its conversion into a company incorporated under the law of the latter Member State, (3) even if there is no change in the location of the real head office of that company. Continue reading “Free Choice of Company Law: Another Brick Out of the Wall”