|
Library
|
Your profile |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.|
Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law
Reference:
Fedchuk V.D.
Responsibility of Participants of Group Companies
and their Directors in the Modern Italian Law
// Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law.
2015. ¹ 2.
P. 256-268.
URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=66712
Fedchuk V.D. Responsibility of Participants of Group Companies and their Directors in the Modern Italian LawAbstract: The present article is devoted to the analysis of one of the most significant novella introduced by the Italian Company law Reform of 2004, namely, the norms governing the responsibility of controlling persons (companies and their directors) for damages caused to shareholders and creditors in the process of implementation of the control functions. The leading role in this issue played two concepts – the concept of "management and coordination" and the concept of "competitive advantages" which was used by the reform as a basis for regulating relations between the affiliated companies. The authors concluded that some elements of the legal regulation of groups of companies in the law of Germany and Italy would be taken into account in the development of Russian civil law. Keywords: reform of law of company, group of companies, controlling company, controlled company, dependent companies, unitary direction, group of companies’ interest, conception of management and coordination, conception of competitive advantages, group of companies’ bankruptcy, controlling company’s liability, liability of director.
This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article
This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here . References
1. Rafalyuk E.E. Obrashchenie k pravovoy kul'ture kak sposob preodoleniya krizisa prava i gosudarstva (Obzor raboty Mezhdunarodnogo kongressa «Osnovnye napravleniya razvitiya Evropeyskogo konstitutsionnogo prava» (Kataniya, Italiya, 29-30 noyabrya 2011 g.) // Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya. 2011. ¹ 6. S. 120-123.
2. Fedchuk V.D. De facto zavisimost' de jure nezavisimykh yuridicheskikh lits: proniknovenie za korporativnyy zana-ves v prave vedushchikh zarubezhnykh stran. M.: Volters Kluver, 2007. 3. Fedchuk V.D. Zakonodatel'naya reforma v Italii: usilenie otvetstvennosti kontroliruyushchego obshchestva // Vestnik GRP pri Minyuste Rossii. 2011. ¹ 5. 4. Fedchuk V.D. Pravovoe regulirovanie grupp kompaniy: sovremennoe natsional'noe pravo zarubezhnykh stran // Vestnik GRP pri Minyuste Rossii. 2010. ¹ 6. 5. Fedchuk V.D. Pravovoy status uchastnikov grupp kompaniy: sdelki kontroliruyushchikh lits i sredstva zashchity ot nikh (sravnitel'no-pravovoy analiz norm prava vedushchikh zarubezhnykh stran). LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, Saar-bryukken, Germaniya. 2013. 6. Fedchuk V.D. Sovremennyy pravovoy rezhim grupp kompaniy: poslereformennyy opyt Italii // Vestnik GRP pri Minyuste Rossii. 2014. ¹ 1-2. 7. Fedchuk V.D. Sredstva zashchity interesov zavisimykh kompaniy ot tunnelingovykh sdelok v prave vedushchikh evropey-skikh gosudarstv // Vestnik GRP pri Minyuste Rossii. 2013. ¹ 1. 8. Alessandri, Attivita d’impresa e responsabilita penali, Riv.It.Dir.Proc.Pen.2005. 9. Ambrosiani, La riforma delle societa, Profili della nuova disciplina, Torino, 2007. 10. Bonelli, Conflitto di interesse nei gruppi di societa, Giur. Comm. 1992. 11. Campobasso, La riforma delle societa di capitali e delle cooperative, Torino, 2003. 12. Cariello, The Compensation of Damages with Advantages Deriving from Management and Coordination Activity (Direzione e Coordinamento) of the Parent Company, ECEF 3/2006. 13. Ciampoli, I “vantaggi compensative” nei gruppi di societa, Soc. 2005. 14. Cottino, Il nuovo diritto societario, Bologna, 2004. 15. Cozian/Viandier/Deboissy Droit des societes 17th edn. 2004. 16. Denozza, Rules vs. standards nella disciplina dei gruppi: l’inefficienza delle compensazioni “virtuali”, Giur. Comm. 2000. 17. Eisenberg, The Duty of Good Faith in American Corporate Law, ECFR 1/2006. 18. Galgano, Il regolamento di gruppo nei gruppi bancari, BBTC 2005. 19. Huffer, Aktiengesetz, 7th edn. 2006, Munich. 20. Marco Ventoruzzo, Experiments in Comparative Corporate Law: The Recent Italian Reform and the Dubious Virtues of a Market for Rules in the Absence of Effective Regulatory Competition, 40 Tex. Int’l L.J. (2004). 21. Montalenti, Conflitto di interesse nei gruppi di societa e teoria dei vantaggi compensative, Giur. Comm. 1995. 22. Montalenti, Gruppi e conflitti di interesse nella legge per la riforma del diritto societario, Giur.Comm. 2002. 23. Panzani, L’azione di responsabilita ed il coinvolgimento del gruppo di imprese dopo la riforma, Soc. 2002. 24. Pavone La Rosa, Nuovi profili della disciplina lei gruppi societari, Riv.Soc.2000. 25. Portale, La riforma delle societa di capitali e limiti di effettivita del diritto nazionale, Corr.Giur.2003. 26. Portale, Osservazioni sullo schema di decreto delegato in tema di riforma delle societa di capitali, Riv.Dir.Priv.2002. 27. Pratelli, Problemi in tema di “sindicati di gestione”, Giur. Comm. 2005. 28. Rordorf, Il recess del socio di societa di capitali: prime osservazioni dopo la riforma, Soc. 2003. 29. Rossi, Relazione introduttiva, vantaggi compensative nei gruppi, Giur.Comm.2002. 30. Rovelli, Direzione unitaria e responsabilita nel gruppo, Soc. 1989. 31. Sacchi, Sulla responsabilita da direzione e coordinamento nella riforma delle societa di capitali, Giur. Comm. 2003, I. 32. Salafia, La responsabilita della holding nei confronti dei soci di minoranza delle controllate, Soc. 2003. 33. Sandulli, Santoro e.a., La riforma delle societa, In Le nuove leggi del diritto dell’economia, Bologna, 2003. 34. Sbisa, Responsabilita della capogruppo e vantaggi compensative, Contr. Imp. 2003. 35. Spada, L’amministrazione della societa per azioni tra interesse sociale e interesse di gruppo, Riv.Dir.Civ.1989, I, 233. 36. Zakony: – Codice Civile 1942; – ¹ 6/2003; – ¹ 61/2002 (D.Lgs.11.04.2002); – ¹ 366/2001. 37. Akty i dokumenty: – The Final Report of the High Level Group of Company Law Experts on a Modern Regulatory Framework for Company law in Europe (also called Winter Report), ZGR 1985. – Forum Europaeum Konzernrecht, ZGR 1998, 672, 729. 38. Sudebnye resheniya: – BGHZ 159. – BGHZ 83, 122. – Cass. 24.8.2004 no.16707, Soc. 2005, 164. – Cass. 24.02.2004, Foro It. 2006, II, 56. – Cass.15.6.2000 no. 8159, Giur.comm.2002, II, 34. – Cass 6.3.1999 no. 1925 and Cass 14.9.1999 no. 9795, Giur.Comm. 2000, II, 167. – Cass.5.12.1998 no.12325, Giur.it.1999, 2317. – Cass. 22.10.1998 no. 10488, Mass. Foro it. 1998. – Cass. 4.4.1998 no. 3483, Mass. Foro It. 1998. – Cass 27.05.1997 no. 4701, Giur.It. 1998. – Cass. 28.4.1997 no. 3652, Mass. Foro It. 1997. – Cass. 28.3.1996 no. 2850, Soc.1996, 1397. – Cass.11.3.1996 no. 2001. – App. Milano 10.3.1995, Soc. 1995, 1437. – Cass 26.2.1990 no. 1439 (Caltagirone), Giur.It.1990, I,1,713. – Cass. 21.5.1988 no. 3544, Giur. Comm.. 1989, II, 203; – Trib. Bologna 12.9.2001, Giur.Comm.2003, II, 128. – Trib.Milano 22.1.2001, Fall 2001. 39. European Commission [Sayt]. URL: http: // ec.europa.eu/internal_market/company/docs/modern/report_en.pd |
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.
Eng
