IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/eucflr/v18y2021i4p588-607n7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Creditor Protection and Divisions – Did the CJEU Get It Right?

Author

Listed:
  • Alexandropoulou Antigoni

    (Associate Professor, European University Cyprus, Nicosia; Chair of the Company Law Committee of the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.Cyprus)

  • Winner Martin

    (Professor, Vienna University of Economics and Business; Chairman of the Austrian Takeover Commission.Germany)

Abstract

The CJEU’s I.G.I. decision deals with an important aspect of creditor protection in divisions. The Court holds that the actio pauliana under Italian law may be applied to divisions, notwithstanding that such a protective measure is not foreseen in art. 146 and 153 Directive 2017/1132/EU. We argue that the Directive’s ex post protective measures should be understood as fully harmonizing provisions. The decision fails to strike the right balance between the interests of all relevant stakeholders involved, especially between different groups of creditors, and unduly impairs legal certainty. However, if one takes the decision as a basis, the judgment gives Member States considerable room to introduce or maintain additional safeguards in their national legal systems. We show that national legislators should not give in to this temptation, neither for domestic nor for cross-border divisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexandropoulou Antigoni & Winner Martin, 2021. "Creditor Protection and Divisions – Did the CJEU Get It Right?," European Company and Financial Law Review, De Gruyter, vol. 18(4), pages 588-607, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:eucflr:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:588-607:n:7
    DOI: 10.1515/ecfr-2021-0021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ecfr-2021-0021
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ecfr-2021-0021?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:eucflr:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:588-607:n:7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.