After a year there MoMiG Thomas Wachter legal status in a concise overview of some of the issues faced by the Court has already explained. In addition to the controversial issues in the field of the adopted in the new model protocol will be discussed at the shareholders' list (numbering, shape, signature, feature of the notary certificate) and the requirements for managing (Content of insurance companies with the company registration application, performance of order obstacles) as well as issues of domestic business address. An article worth reading in order to orient themselves in the already adopted law.
Source: SR (Issue 11) "1 year MoMiG - a success story?"
not addressed in the article, but also of great importance, are the new questions of interpretation in the context of § 64 GmbHG. These sets Ulrich Haas in the now published the first edition of 2010 GmbHR detail apart (p. 1-8). He discussed how the particular - affect the emergence of question time point, a claim under § 64 sentence 1 or Theorem 3 to the practice - controversial. When the implications of this matter in insolvency proceedings over the assets of foreign companies is to understand this distinction between the jurisdiction and the applicable law. Further addresses the controversial issues of the payment term and questioned the extent to which some remaining gaps by applying the Tort law suggest.
A great contribution to the difficult questions of § 64 GmbHG in its new form. Also in connection with the financing by shareholder loans takes this standard has a central role since it is different than the new version of § 30 para 1 GmbHG able payments to avoid to shareholders (§ 64 Clause 3 GmbHG) if that their loans receivable want to argue. The practical application of § 64 GmbHG is therefore important for the extent to which shareholders, despite the existence of a repayment claim outside of bankruptcy proceedings may not be satisfied.
A great contribution to the difficult questions of § 64 GmbHG in its new form. Also in connection with the financing by shareholder loans takes this standard has a central role since it is different than the new version of § 30 para 1 GmbHG able payments to avoid to shareholders (§ 64 Clause 3 GmbHG) if that their loans receivable want to argue. The practical application of § 64 GmbHG is therefore important for the extent to which shareholders, despite the existence of a repayment claim outside of bankruptcy proceedings may not be satisfied.
Source: "Current Issues of liability crisis of the GmbH's managing director, according to § 64 GmbHG" in: GmbHR 2010, 1ff.
0 comments:
Post a Comment