1 / 4

European Insolvency Regulation

European Insolvency Regulation. CASE C-444/07 MG ProBUD GDYNIA sp. Z o.o. ECJ JUDGMENT of 21.01.2010 Dr Marek Porzycki. Facts of the case. MG Probud Gdynia sp. z o.o. – a company of Polish law with registered office in Poland and a branch in Germany

javier
Télécharger la présentation

European Insolvency Regulation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. European Insolvency Regulation CASE C-444/07 MG ProBUD GDYNIA sp. Z o.o. ECJ JUDGMENT of 21.01.2010 Dr Marek Porzycki

  2. Facts of the case • MG Probud Gdynia sp. z o.o. – a company of Polish law with registered office in Poland and a branch in Germany • Polish insolvency proceedings (upadłość obejmująca likwidację) opened on 9 June 2005 by the Sąd Rejonowy Gdańsk-Północ • Customs Office of Saarbruecken, Germany applied for attachment of assets of the debtor (balance held on a banking account in Germany and claims against German parties), in order to secure claims resulting from alleged infringement of social security regulations. • Attachment order issued by the Amtsgericht Saarbruecken on 11 June 2005

  3. Facts of the case 2 • Appeal against attachment order dismissed by Landsgericht Saarbruecken on 4 August 2005 • Fear that Polish liquidator would transfer the amounts in question to Poland quoted as reason for upholding the attachment order • No secondary proceedings in Germany • Sąd Rejonowy Gdańsk-Północ questions the lawfullness of the attachment, as under Polish bankruptcy law (Article 146 of the BRL) attachment of assets included in the bankruptcy estate is not allowed

  4. Legalissuesaddressed by the ECJ • Polish decision to open insolvency proceedings did not indicate grounds for international jurisdiction • Registered office of the debtor in Poland + no grounds to rebut the presumption of Article 3(1) of the EIR  COMI in Poland, Polish proceedings are main proceedings • Main insolvency proceedings opened in Poland  automatic recognition and universal effect under Articles 16(1) and 17(1) of the EIR • Polish law decides whether enforcement measures related to the assets of the debtor are allowed (Article 4 of the EIR) • German authorities are not entitled to order enforcement measures related to assets of the debtor if Polish law does not allow them. • Attachment by German authorities is unlawful, Polish liquidator can presumably transfer the assets to Polish main proceedings (unless secondary proceedings is opend in Germany)

More Related