15 results
The Principles of European Family Law Regarding the Property, Maintenance and Succession Rights of Couples in De Facto Unions: A First Glimpse
- from PART I - THE CEFL AND ITS PRINCIPLES
-
- By Katharina Boele-Woelki, President of Bucerius Law School in Hamburg., Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of private international law at the University of Barcelona., Nigel Lowe, Emeritus Professor of Law at Cardiff University., Dieter Martiny, Emeritus Professor at European University Viadrina in Frankfurt (Oder).
- Edited by Katharina Boele-Woelki, Dieter Martiny
-
- Book:
- Plurality and Diversity of Family Relations in Europe
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 09 November 2019
- Print publication:
- 29 August 2019, pp 17-44
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
At the 6th CEFL Conference on Plurality and Diversity of Family Relations in Europe, the draft of the Principles of European Family Law Regarding the Property, Maintenance and Successions Rights of Couples in de facto Unions was presented. The day before the conference, this draft had been discussed at great length with CEFL's Expert Group, whose members had prepared the national reports. In the following we will provide a brief overview of the draft.
THE GENERAL APPROACH
2.1. METHOD
Based upon a questionnaire containing 74 questions, CEFL's experts drafted 29 national reports. The questions addressed a few general issues (legal sources, historical developments and law reforms), statistics and estimations, issues that arise during the relationship, separation and death, as well as agreements between the partners and, finally, disputes. The comparative material was compiled in a book that was published in 2014. The drafting of the Principles took place at eight meetings of CEFL's Organising Committee, comprising seven members, four of whom are the authors of this contribution, plus Frédé rique Ferrand (Lyon), Maarit Jänterä -Jareborg (Uppsala) and Velina Todorova (Sofia). At these meetings the Principles were formulated, the relevant international and European instruments were analysed, the comparative overviews with references to all national reports were drafted and the comments which explain the Principles were designed and discussed.
2.2. STRUCTURE
The fifth set of CEFL's Principles of European Family Law consists of 27 Principles contained in seven chapters. The structure of the new set of Principles is comparable with previous sets of Principles. They start with a Preamble, followed by the first chapter on definitions and the scope of application. General rights and duties are then addressed. Agreements, property and debts, separation, death and disputes are the titles of the subsequent chapters.
2.3. TERMINOLOGY
During the drafting process of the Principles the terminology was changed. Initially, in the questionnaire and the publication of the national reports, the term ‘informal relationship’ was used. The term ‘informal’, however, is just the opposite of ‘formal’, which indicates marriage and registered partnerships and the like. More importantly the term ‘informal’ suggests that there is a lesser commitment by the persons involved, which, however, cannot be assumed.
The Spanish Constitutional Court and Protracted Child Abduction Proceedings: Time is of the Essence
- from Part II - International Family Law
-
- By Cristina González Beilfuss, University of Barcelona, Spain
- Edited by Gillian Douglas, Mervyn Murch, Victoria Stephens
-
- Book:
- International and National Perspectives on Child and Family Law
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 12 October 2018
- Print publication:
- 14 June 2018, pp 259-266
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
There is no doubt that Nigel Lowe has decisively contributed to an improvement in the implementation of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention. One of the main findings of the statistics he so efficiently elaborates for the Hague Conference on Private International Law, is that time is of the essence. It is well known that the six-week time-limit that the Hague Convention recommends in Article 11, is very oft en not met and that delayed return orders can be extremely difficult to enforce. Time, it is said, runs in favour of the abductor.
In a decision rendered on 1 February 2016, the Spanish Constitutional Court has apparently gone one step further. It decided that a return order may be in breach of the Spanish Constitution if it is delayed, the child is well-settled in its new environment, and this factor is not taken into account in the return proceedings. Whether the application was initiated swift ly has no relevance. What matters is the impact of time on the child, whose best interests should be paramount.
The present chapter, which is dedicated to Nigel Lowe in admiration and respect, seeks to explain and contextualise the Spanish Constitutional Court's decision. Contrary to what is generally assumed, the decision does not necessarily undermine the Child Abduction Convention, but is a further incentive for accelerating return proceedings and improving Spanish practice.
THE FACTS OF THE CASE
Even though it does not seem to play a significant role in the reasoning of the Constitutional Court, it is worth mentioning that in the case at hand, there were allegations of domestic violence. The Spanish mother was spending the summer holidays with the Swiss father in Greece, when there was a violent quarrel between the parents. The Greek police intervened. The mother and the five-year-old daughter then flew with the father's consent from Greece to Spain, to spend a few weeks with the maternal grandparents. The child was subsequently not returned to her place of habitual residence in Switzerland but stayed in Spain, where the mother claimed that she had suffered domestic violence throughout her relationship with the father.
In November 2013, three months aft er the child arrived in Spain, the father initiated return proceedings under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention.
Southern Jurisdictions: Consolidation in the West, Progress in the East
- from Part I - Formalising a Same-Sex Relationship: Marriage and Partnership
-
- By Cristina González Beilfuss, University of Barcelona
- Edited by Katharina Boele-Woelki, Angelika Fuchs
-
- Book:
- Same-Sex Relationships and Beyond
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 29 September 2018
- Print publication:
- 31 March 2017, pp 39-54
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
A few years ago, when I reported on the situation in the four Southern European jurisdictions that will be dealt with in this report, namely in Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece, I wrote about a sharp contrast between the two more Western legal systems (Portugal and Spain) and the two Eastern jurisdictions (Italy and Greece). Whereas the first afforded full recognition to same-sex couples, allowed them to marry, and also recognised same-sex partnerships outside the institution of marriage, the second did not afford any kind of legal recognition to couples of the same sex.
Decisions by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) have changed the legal landscape in the East. In comparison, the West appears to be undergoing a phase of consolidation. The contrast is less acute than it was five years ago, but there is still significant divergence between the South's West and East. Issues related to children and particularly in connection with assisted reproduction pose problems almost everywhere.
MARRIAGE AND OTHER FORMS OF LEGAL RECOGNITION OF SAME-SEX COUPLES: SPAIN AND PORTUGAL
Both Spain and Portugal opened up marriage to same-sex couples through legislative action. The opening up of marriage was contested by significant sectors of society and challenged on constitutional grounds. The opening up of marriage was not the result of consensus, but a victory for left -wing parties that happened to be in power when this step was taken. After some years, the issue is, however, no longer contentious: opinion polls prove that same-sex marriage is widely accepted, even though the number of marriages effectively contracted is relatively low.
A further common characteristic of the two Iberian countries is that marriage is not the only legal institution available to same-sex partners. Both countries have legislation on unmarried couples that is applicable to samesex and different-sex partnerships without distinction. It should, however, be stressed that this legislation departs from the registered partnership model that prevails in other European jurisdictions. Portuguese and some Spanish statutes on unmarried couples do not require couples to perform any kind of formal act but become applicable on the basis of a factual element: cohabitation. The regime applies to all couples who fall under the scope of application of such special legislation and not only to those who voluntarily opt for it.
The Unification of Private International Law in Europe: A Success Story?
- Edited by Katharina Boele-Woelki, Joanna K. Miles, Jens M. Scherpe
-
- Book:
- The Future of Family Property in Europe
- Published by:
- Intersentia
- Published online:
- 08 May 2020
- Print publication:
- 22 April 2011, pp 329-340
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
If an outside observer were to look at the development of private international law in Europe during the last decade he or she would certainly be amazed at the amount of new Community legislation that has either already been passed or is currently being prepared. But not only would the sheer number of new rules catch his or her attention but also the speed of such development, which only started ten years ago when the Treaty of Amsterdam entered into force and the European Community gained competence to legislate in this area of the law. The landscape of the unification of private international law in Europe has completely changed. Gone are the old days when after lengthy preparation the Hague Conference produced one instrument every four years and this instrument was carefully scrutinized and discussed before it eventually came into force! Instead there is hustle and bustle everywhere!
This is even the case in the area of family and succession law where Community involvement came somewhat as a surprise. The Brussels II bis Regulation on the dissolution of marriage and parental responsibility has been applicable since March 2005 and is already a substitute for Regulation 1347/2000. It contains rules on jurisdiction, cooperation between authorities and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in the areas of divorce, separation and marriage annulment, as well as on parental responsibility. A new Maintenance Regulation was adopted in 2009. When it comes into force it will replace the rules on jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of the Brussels I Regulation, and will also provide a new cooperation regime between the authorities of the different Member States. A Proposal for a new Regulation on Succession is currently being discussed in Brussels. Two new Proposals authorizing and implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the law applicable to divorce and legal separation were made public at the end of March 2010. The Council decision authorizing enhanced cooperation in this area was subsequently very quickly adopted on 12th July 2010. On 20th December 2010 Council Regulation 1259/2010 was finally approved. A working party is preparing a proposal for a Regulation on matrimonial property, which should be ready during the second semester of 2010. The European Union can certainly not be blamed for not being productive.
Case 4 - Basic insolvency situation
-
- By Georg Graf, Professor of Private Law, University of Salzburg, Austria, Monika Hinteregger, Professor of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Manuela Weissenbacher, Assistant to the Chair of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Benoit Allemeersch, Doctoral researcher Catholic, University of Leuven, Belgium; Attorney-at-Law bar of Brussels, Belgium, Alain Verbeke, Professor of Private and Comparative Law, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Merete Clausen, Attorney-at-Law, Denmark, Lionel Smith, James McGill Professor of Law, McGill University Montreal, Canada, Jarmo Tuomisto, Professor of Civil Law, University of Turku, Finland, François Barrière, Junior Professor, University of Paris II, France, Stefan Grundmann, Professor of Private Law European and International Private and Business Law, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, George K. Lekkas, Attorney-at-Law, Athens, Greece, Niamh Moloney, Professor of Capital Markets Law, University of Nottingham, England, Eoin O'Dell, Fellow, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Antonio Gambaro, Professor of Comparative Private Law, State University of Milan, Italy, Michele Graziadei, Professor of Comparative Private Law, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy, Steve Jacoby, Partner Kremer Associés & Clifford Chance; Lecturer, University of Luxembourg, Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Attorney-at-Law Houthoff Buruma, NV, Amsterdam the Netherlands, Pedro Pais de Vasconcelos, Professor, University of Lisbon, Portugal, George L. Gretton, Lord President Reid Professor of Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Sergio Cámara Lapuente, Professor of Civil Law, University of La Rioja, Spain, Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of Private International Law, University of Barcelona, Spain, Torgny Håstad, Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and formerly Professor of Private Law, Uppsala University, Sweden
- Edited by Michele Graziadei, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro, Ugo Mattei, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy, Lionel Smith, McGill University, Montréal
-
- Book:
- Commercial Trusts in European Private Law
- Published online:
- 22 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 November 2005, pp 285-340
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Case
Alternative 1
Tom is a real estate agent. One of the immovables he is trying to sell is an apartment belonging to Samantha. Bill is interested in buying this apartment. To show his seriousness in entering into negotiations, Bill writes a cheque for €10,000 as a deposit, which is to be refundable if the sale does not proceed. On Tom's instructions, Bill makes the cheque payable to Tom, and Tom deposits this cheque into his own bank account. The negotiations between Samantha and Bill break off with no contract, and Bill tells Tom to refund the money. Tom, who has made no withdrawal from the bank account in the intervening time, has become insolvent. Does Bill's claim to his deposit have priority over competing claims, or is he treated as a general creditor? Would it make a difference if Tom were a practising lawyer?
Alternative 2
Tom is a travel agent. He sells tickets from various airlines to his customers. The money paid for the tickets by his customers is deposited in a bank account in Tom's name. When Tom becomes insolvent, some customers already have their tickets and some do not (and those who do not have tickets have no contractual claims against the airlines). The customers who have not been issued tickets claim back their money. The airlines claim payment from the bank account for tickets that have been issued. Tom's general creditors also claim the money in the bank account.
Case 1 - Creation and termination of the management relationship; powers of the manager
-
- By Georg Graf, Professor of Private Law, University of Salzburg, Austria, Monika Hinteregger, Professor of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Manuela Weissenbacher, Assistant to the Chair of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Benoit Allemeersch, Doctoral researcher Catholic, University of Leuven Belgium; Attorney-at-Law bar of Brussels, Belgium, Alain Verbeke, Professor of Private and Comparative Law, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Merete Clausen, Attorney-at-Law, Denmark, Lionel Smith, James McGill Professor of Law, McGill University Montreal, Canada, Jarmo Tuomisto, Professor of Civil Law, University of Turku, Finland, François Barrière, Junior Professor, University of Paris II, France, Stefan Grundmann, Professor of Private Law European and International Private and Business Law, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, George K. Lekkas, Attorney-at-Law, Athens, Greece, Niamh Moloney, Professor of Capital Markets Law, University of Nottingham, England, Eoin O'Dell, Fellow, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Antonio Gambaro, Professor of Comparative Private Law, State University of Milan, Italy, Michele Graziadei, Professor of Comparative Private Law, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy, Steve Jacoby, Partner Kremer Associés & Clifford Chance; Lecturer, University of Luxembourg, Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Attorney-at-Law Houthoff Buruma, NV, Amsterdam the Netherlands, Pedro Pais de Vasconcelos, Professor, University of Lisbon, Portugal, George L. Gretton, Lord President Reid Professor of Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Sergio Cámara Lapuente, Professor of Civil Law, University of La Rioja, Spain, Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of Private International Law, University of Barcelona, Spain, Torgny Håstad, Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and formerly Professor of Private Law, Uppsala University, Sweden
- Edited by Michele Graziadei, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro, Ugo Mattei, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy, Lionel Smith, McGill University, Montréal
-
- Book:
- Commercial Trusts in European Private Law
- Published online:
- 22 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 November 2005, pp 103-217
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Case
John is a professional investment manager. Sam decides to make use of John's services after learning that he is a skilful manager. In John's office, Sam signs a document granting John full investment powers over a capital value of €2,000,000. The terms of the document indicate that John's powers are to be irrevocable for the term of five years. These powers enable John, inter alia, to buy and sell any kind of asset, including immovables. The document also provides that John will credit all the income produced by the managed capital to Sam's bank account. It stipulates that John will be entitled to deduct an annual fee, calculated as a percentage of the capital value of the managed assets. Sam then writes a cheque payable to John for €2,000,000.
Alternative 1
In the second year of their relationship, Sam reads in a newspaper that John is implicated in the international trafficking of stolen works of art. He does not know whether the allegations are true but he decides to terminate their relationship. He communicates this to John. He demands restitution of the managed assets, as well as a full account of the investments that have been made. Upon John's refusal, Sam sues, asking for: (a) a judicial declaration that the relationship is terminated; (b) a remedy enjoining John from entering into any further transaction related to the assets; (c) a full audit of the previous period; (d) restitution of the managed assets; and (e) damages.
Case 8 - Pensions funds
-
- By Georg Graf, Professor of Private Law, University of Salzburg, Austria, Monika Hinteregger, Professor of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Manuela Weissenbacher, Assistant to the Chair of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Benoit Allemeersch, Doctoral researcher Catholic, University of Leuven, Belgium; Attorney-at-Law bar of Brussels, Belgium, Alain Verbeke, Professor of Private and Comparative Law, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Merete Clausen, Attorney-at-Law, Denmark, Lionel Smith, Professor of Law, McGill University Canada, Jarmo Tuomisto, Professor of Civil Law, University of Turku, Finland, François Barrière, Junior Professor, University of Paris II, France, Stefan Grundmann, Professor of Private Law European and International Private and Business Law, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, George K. Lekkas, Attorney-at-Law, Athens, Greece, Niamh Moloney, Professor of Capital Markets Law, University of Nottingham, England, Eoin O'Dell, Fellow, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Antonio Gambaro, Professor of Comparative Private Law, State University of Milan, Italy, Michele Graziadei, Professor of Comparative Private Law, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy, Steve Jacoby, Partner Kremer Associés & Clifford Chance; Lecturer, University of Luxembourg, Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Attorney-at-Law Houthoff Buruma, NV, Amsterdam the Netherlands, Pedro Pais de Vasconcelos, Professor, University of Lisbon, Portugal, George L. Gretton, Lord President Reid Professor of Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Sergio Cámara Lapuente, Professor of Civil Law, University of La Rioja, Spain, Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of Private International Law, University of Barcelona, Spain, Torgny Håstad, Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and formerly Professor of Private Law, Uppsala University, Sweden
- Edited by Michele Graziadei, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro, Ugo Mattei, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy, Lionel Smith, McGill University, Montréal
-
- Book:
- Commercial Trusts in European Private Law
- Published online:
- 22 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 November 2005, pp 431-455
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Case
A pension fund for employees of a company, that provides a specified benefit upon retirement, has been running for several years. Both the employer and the employees make contributions to the fund. The managers of the fund are of the opinion that there is a surplus of funds as a result of successful investments.
a. Can the employer suspend making contributions?
b. To whom does the surplus belong?
Discussion
AUSTRIA
An employees' pension fund that provides a specified benefit upon retirement, several years after the employer and the employee have made contributions to the fund, is not a ‘pension fund’ according to the Austrian Investment Fund Act. However, Austrian private law recognises alternative concepts that meet the requirements described in Case 8. These alternatives are based on a specific statute called the Betriebspensionsgesetz (BPG). There are basically three pension fund schemes under s. 2 BPG.
The first scheme is called Pensionskasse (s. 2 Z 1 BPG). This pension scheme is an insurance solution that allows the employer to organise the insurance entity. The insurance entity has its own legal personality based on a specific statute, the Pensionskassengesetz (PKG). Both the employer and the employee pay contributions to the insurance entity on behalf of the employee. The employees can claim benefits upon retirement, regardless of whether they still have an employment contract with the same employer.
The second pension fund scheme is a direct promise pension (direkte Leistungszusage) (s. 2 Z 2 BPG).
Case 7 - Choice of law
-
- By Georg Graf, Professor of Private Law, University of Salzburg, Austria, Monika Hinteregger, Professor of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Manuela Weissenbacher, Assistant to the Chair of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Benoit Allemeersch, Doctoral researcher Catholic, University of Leuven, Belgium; Attorney-at-Law bar of Brussels, Belgium, Alain Verbeke, Professor of Private and Comparative Law, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Merete Clausen, Attorney-at-Law, Denmark, Lionel Smith, Professor of Law, McGill University Canada, Jarmo Tuomisto, Professor of Civil Law, University of Turku, Finland, François Barrière, Junior Professor, University of Paris II, France, Stefan Grundmann, Professor of Private Law European and International Private and Business Law, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, George K. Lekkas, Attorney-at-Law, Athens, Greece, Niamh Moloney, Professor of Capital Markets Law, University of Nottingham, England, Eoin O'Dell, Fellow, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Antonio Gambaro, Professor of Comparative Private Law, State University of Milan, Italy, Michele Graziadei, Professor of Comparative Private Law, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy, Steve Jacoby, Partner Kremer Associés & Clifford Chance; Lecturer, University of Luxembourg, Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Attorney-at-Law Houthoff Buruma, NV, Amsterdam the Netherlands, Pedro Pais de Vasconcelos, Professor, University of Lisbon, Portugal, George L. Gretton, Lord President Reid Professor of Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Sergio Cámara Lapuente, Professor of Civil Law, University of La Rioja, Spain, Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of Private International Law, University of Barcelona, Spain, Torgny Håstad, Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and formerly Professor of Private Law, Uppsala University, Sweden
- Edited by Michele Graziadei, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro, Ugo Mattei, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy, Lionel Smith, McGill University, Montréal
-
- Book:
- Commercial Trusts in European Private Law
- Published online:
- 22 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 November 2005, pp 406-430
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Case
Jane manages property in the interest of her client, Monica. The property is located in your country, where both Monica and Jane live and are domiciled. In their agreement they introduce a clause stating that their relationship is a trust governed by Jersey law. Litigation arises between them. Jane claims the invalidity of the trust provision of the arrangement, and claims that local law should govern the relationship. What is the result?
Discussion
AUSTRIA
Austria has not ratified the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Trusts and on their Recognition. Since both of the parties live and are domiciled in Austria, and the property is located there as well, the proposed relationship does not include any foreign element; this precludes the application of the Austrian conflicts law (IPRG). Therefore, the validity of the ‘choice of law clause’ between Jane and Monica is governed by the general rules of Austrian law.
Due to the contractual autonomy of the parties, the clause is legally valid and Jersey law governs the trust or fiduciary relationship. This, however, is only true as far as the default part of Austrian law is concerned; the parties cannot ‘contract out’ of the application of mandatory provisions of Austrian law. As a result, contractual autonomy permits the applicability of Jersey law regarding the contractual part of the trust, whereas the proprietary or real aspects of the relationship follow the lex rei sitae, which is Austrian law in this case.
Case 2 - Investment duties
-
- By Georg Graf, Professor of Private Law, University of Salzburg, Austria, Monika Hinteregger, Professor of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Manuela Weissenbacher, Assistant to the Chair of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Benoit Allemeersch, Doctoral researcher Catholic, University of Leuven, Belgium; Attorney-at-Law bar of Brussels, Belgium, Alain Verbeke, Professor of Private and Comparative Law, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Merete Clausen, Attorney-at-Law, Denmark, Jarmo Tuomisto, Professor of Civil Law, University of Turku, Finland, François Barrière, Junior Professor, University of Paris II, France, Stefan Grundmann, Professor of Private Law European and International Private and Business Law, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, George K. Lekkas, Attorney-at-Law, Athens, Greece, Niamh Moloney, Professor of Capital Markets Law, University of Nottingham, England, Eoin O'Dell, Fellow, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Antonio Gambaro, Professor of Comparative Private Law, State University of Milan, Italy, Michele Graziadei, Professor of Comparative Private Law, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy, Steve Jacoby, Partner Kremer Associés & Clifford Chance; Lecturer, University of Luxembourg, Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Attorney-at-Law Houthoff Buruma, NV, Amsterdam the Netherlands, Pedro Pais de Vasconcelos, Professor, University of Lisbon, Portugal, George L. Gretton, Lord President Reid Professor of Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Sergio Cámara Lapuente, Professor of Civil Law, University of La Rioja, Spain, Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of Private International Law, University of Barcelona, Spain, Torgny Håstad, Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and formerly Professor of Private Law, Uppsala University, Sweden
- Edited by Michele Graziadei, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro, Ugo Mattei, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy, Lionel Smith, McGill University, Montréal
-
- Book:
- Commercial Trusts in European Private Law
- Published online:
- 22 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 November 2005, pp 218-246
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Case
John is a professional investment manager. Sam decides to make use of John's services after learning that he is a skilful manager. In John's office, Sam signs a document granting John full investment powers over a capital value of €2,000,000. The terms of the document indicate that John's powers are to be irrevocable for the term of five years. These powers enable John, inter alia, to buy and sell any kind of asset, including immovables. The document also provides that John will credit all the income produced by the managed capital to Sam's bank account. It stipulates that John will be entitled to deduct an annual fee, calculated as a percentage of the capital value of the managed assets. Sam then writes a cheque payable to John for €2,000,000.
Alternative 1
In the second year of their relationship, Sam learns that John has made very risky investments that have done poorly. As a result, he has lost 50 per cent of the value of the capital. Does Sam have any legal recourse?
Alternative 2
In the second year of their relationship, Sam learns that John does not use his own judgement to make any of the investment decisions. Instead John relies exclusively on the recommendations in a well-known monthly financial newsletter. Does Sam have any legal recourse?
Discussion
AUSTRIA
Alternative 1
The contract between John and Sam is to be qualified as a contract of mandate in accordance with ss. 1002 ff. ABGB.
Case 10 - Multiple debenture holders
-
- By Georg Graf, Professor of Private Law, University of Salzburg, Austria, Monika Hinteregger, Professor of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Manuela Weissenbacher, Assistant to the Chair of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Benoit Allemeersch, Doctoral researcher Catholic, University of Leuven, Belgium; Attorney-at-Law bar of Brussels, Belgium, Alain Verbeke, Professor of Private and Comparative Law, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Merete Clausen, Attorney-at-Law, Denmark, Lionel Smith, James McGill Professor of Law, McGill University Montreal, Canada, Jarmo Tuomisto, Professor of Civil Law, University of Turku, Finland, François Barrière, Junior Professor, University of Paris II, France, Stefan Grundmann, Professor of Private Law European and International Private and Business Law, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, George K. Lekkas, Attorney-at-Law, Athens, Greece, Niamh Moloney, Professor of Capital Markets Law, University of Nottingham, England, Eoin O'Dell, Fellow, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Antonio Gambaro, Professor of Comparative Private Law, State University of Milan, Italy, Michele Graziadei, Professor of Comparative Private Law, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy, Steve Jacoby, Partner Kremer Associés & Clifford Chance; Lecturer, University of Luxembourg, Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Attorney-at-Law Houthoff Buruma, NV, Amsterdam the Netherlands, Pedro Pais de Vasconcelos, Professor, University of Lisbon, Portugal, George L. Gretton, Lord President Reid Professor of Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Sergio Cámara Lapuente, Professor of Civil Law, University of La Rioja, Spain, Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of Private International Law, University of Barcelona, Spain, Torgny Håstad, Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and formerly Professor of Private Law, Uppsala University, Sweden
- Edited by Michele Graziadei, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro, Ugo Mattei, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy, Lionel Smith, McGill University, Montréal
-
- Book:
- Commercial Trusts in European Private Law
- Published online:
- 22 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 November 2005, pp 486-504
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Case
A company, XYZ Ltd, wishes to raise money in the financial markets. It is willing and able to give real security to secure the debt. The transaction must be structured so that XYZ Ltd can issue secured debt instruments to multiple investors, in such a way that each investor holds the same kind of real security over the same assets, and so that the enforcement of the security will be practicable. How can these goals be realised?
Discussion
AUSTRIA
There exists in Austrian law an old statute which governs the transaction. This is the Gesetz vom 24. April 1874 betreffend die gemeinsame Vertretung der Rechte der Besitzer von auf Inhaber lautenden oder durch Indossament übertragbaren Teilschuldverschreibungen und die bücherliche Behandlung der für solche Teilschuldverschreibungen eingeräumten Hypothekarrechte. This statute deals with Teilschuldverschreibungen. These are bonds negotiable on the capital market, issued by the company in situations like those of Case 10.
Such bonds can be secured by a mortgage on the immovable property of the company issuing the bonds. The statute enacts special provisions for such a security. The mortgage is created by presenting a mortgage deed to the court responsible for the land register. This document deed has to be drawn up by the company issuing the bonds. The individual bondholder is not registered in the land register. Only the total amount for which the bonds are issued, the number of bonds issued and the dates at which they are to be paid are registered.
Case 9 - Collective investment schemes
-
- By Georg Graf, Professor of Private Law, University of Salzburg, Austria, Monika Hinteregger, Professor of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Manuela Weissenbacher, Assistant to the Chair of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Benoit Allemeersch, Doctoral researcher Catholic, University of Leuven, Belgium; Attorney-at-Law bar of Brussels, Belgium, Alain Verbeke, Professor of Private and Comparative Law, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Merete Clausen, Attorney-at-Law, Denmark, Lionel Smith, Professor of Law, McGill University Canada, Jarmo Tuomisto, Professor of Civil Law, University of Turku, Finland, François Barrière, Junior Professor, University of Paris II, France, Stefan Grundmann, Professor of Private Law European and International Private and Business Law, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, George K. Lekkas, Attorney-at-Law, Athens, Greece, Niamh Moloney, Professor of Capital Markets Law, University of Nottingham, England, Eoin O'Dell, Fellow, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Antonio Gambaro, Professor of Comparative Private Law, State University of Milan, Italy, Michele Graziadei, Professor of Comparative Private Law, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy, Steve Jacoby, Partner Kremer Associés & Clifford Chance; Lecturer, University of Luxembourg, Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Attorney-at-Law Houthoff Buruma, NV, Amsterdam the Netherlands, Pedro Pais de Vasconcelos, Professor, University of Lisbon, Portugal, George L. Gretton, Lord President Reid Professor of Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Sergio Cámara Lapuente, Professor of Civil Law, University of La Rioja, Spain, Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of Private International Law, University of Barcelona, Spain, Torgny Håstad, Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and formerly Professor of Private Law, Uppsala University, Sweden
- Edited by Michele Graziadei, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro, Ugo Mattei, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy, Lionel Smith, McGill University, Montréal
-
- Book:
- Commercial Trusts in European Private Law
- Published online:
- 22 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 November 2005, pp 456-485
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Case
A financial services company wishes to launch a collective investment scheme. It hopes to choose a vehicle that will allow the free transfer of the interests of investors, and which will permit the rules governing the scheme to be changed where necessary.
What options are available to it?
Discussion
AUSTRIA
Austrian private law recognises one type of collective investment scheme, namely, investment funds that fall under the Austrian Investment Fund Act (InvFG). Austrian investment funds are open-ended funds that work on the principle of risk diversification and lend themselves to an open clientele. It is also possible to create special funds that only have a limited number of investors. All types of Austrian investment funds allow for changes of terms and conditions and for changes of investors, although there is no secondary market for trading the investment fund ‘certificates’. Under the Austrian Investment Fund Act, the investors have the right of redemption.
A change of the terms and conditions of an investment fund, under s. 22(3) InvFG, does not require the consent of the investors, but it must be made in their interest, must be approved by the supervisory board and must be published. Section 22(3) InvFG deals only with the public law of the modification.
Different supervision schemes apply for Austrian investment funds. Supervision under the InvFG includes a bank supervisor, a supervisory board, an investment company (a special bank) and the depository bank. The investment company manages the fund and makes the investment decisions.
Case 5 - Insolvency of investment manager
-
- By Georg Graf, Professor of Private Law, University of Salzburg, Austria, Monika Hinteregger, Professor of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Manuela Weissenbacher, Assistant to the Chair of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Benoit Allemeersch, Doctoral researcher Catholic, University of Leuven, Belgium; Attorney-at-Law bar of Brussels, Belgium, Alain Verbeke, Professor of Private and Comparative Law, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Merete Clausen, Attorney-at-Law, Denmark, Lionel Smith, Professor of Law, McGill University Canada, Jarmo Tuomisto, Professor of Civil Law, University of Turku, Finland, François Barrière, Junior Professor, University of Paris II, France, Stefan Grundmann, Professor of Private Law European and International Private and Business Law, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, George K. Lekkas, Attorney-at-Law, Athens, Greece, Niamh Moloney, Professor of Capital Markets Law, University of Nottingham, England, Eoin O'Dell, Fellow, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Antonio Gambaro, Professor of Comparative Private Law, State University of Milan, Italy, Michele Graziadei, Professor of Comparative Private Law, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy, Steve Jacoby, Partner Kremer Associés & Clifford Chance; Lecturer, University of Luxembourg, Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Attorney-at-Law Houthoff Buruma, NV, Amsterdam the Netherlands, Pedro Pais de Vasconcelos, Professor, University of Lisbon, Portugal, George L. Gretton, Lord President Reid Professor of Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Sergio Cámara Lapuente, Professor of Civil Law, University of La Rioja, Spain, Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of Private International Law, University of Barcelona, Spain, Torgny Håstad, Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and formerly Professor of Private Law, Uppsala University, Sweden
- Edited by Michele Graziadei, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro, Ugo Mattei, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy, Lionel Smith, McGill University, Montréal
-
- Book:
- Commercial Trusts in European Private Law
- Published online:
- 22 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 November 2005, pp 341-368
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Case
Roberto is a professional investment manager. He manages assets in the interest of different clients, namely Simon, Rebecca and Ruth. The managed assets are bought with money transferred to him by his clients. Roberto offers different forms of services: (a) individual management services, under which he is to keep separate the position of each client; (b) participation in a collective investment scheme, whereby the assets managed for his clients are pooled and each participant in the scheme will share pro rata the returns on the collective investments; and (c) shares of an investment company (DEF Ltd) which holds investments chosen by Roberto.
One year after receiving the money from his clients, Roberto becomes personally insolvent. Which of his clients is better off: Simon, who chose option a; Rebecca, who chose option b; or Ruth, who chose option c?
Discussion
AUSTRIA
Option a
Professional investment managers, who offer the individual management services enumerated in s. 1 (1) ((19)) BWG, are not allowed to take over money from their clients. The managed assets are deposited in bank accounts in their clients' names. Professional investment managers do not carry out their services on a fiduciary basis, because they are obliged to act in the name and for the account of their clients. They are direct representatives, who are mandated and authorised by the clients to carry out specific investment services.
Case 3 - Conflict of interest
-
- By Georg Graf, Professor of Private Law, University of Salzburg, Austria, Monika Hinteregger, Professor of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Manuela Weissenbacher, Assistant to the Chair of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Benoit Allemeersch, Doctoral researcher Catholic, University of Leuven, Belgium; Attorney-at-Law bar of Brussels, Belgium, Alain Verbeke, Professor of Private and Comparative Law, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Merete Clausen, Attorney-at-Law, Denmark, Jarmo Tuomisto, Professor of Civil Law, University of Turku, Finland, François Barrière, Junior Professor, University of Paris II, France, Stefan Grundmann, Professor of Private Law European and International Private and Business Law, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, George K. Lekkas, Attorney-at-Law, Athens, Greece, Niamh Moloney, Professor of Capital Markets Law, University of Nottingham, England, Eoin O'Dell, Fellow, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Antonio Gambaro, Professor of Comparative Private Law, State University of Milan, Italy, Michele Graziadei, Professor of Comparative Private Law, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy, Steve Jacoby, Partner Kremer Associés & Clifford Chance; Lecturer, University of Luxembourg, Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Attorney-at-Law Houthoff Buruma, NV, Amsterdam the Netherlands, Pedro Pais de Vasconcelos, Professor, University of Lisbon, Portugal, George L. Gretton, Lord President Reid Professor of Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Sergio Cámara Lapuente, Professor of Civil Law, University of La Rioja, Spain, Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of Private International Law, University of Barcelona, Spain, Torgny Håstad, Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and formerly Professor of Private Law, Uppsala University, Sweden
- Edited by Michele Graziadei, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro, Ugo Mattei, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy, Lionel Smith, McGill University, Montréal
-
- Book:
- Commercial Trusts in European Private Law
- Published online:
- 22 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 November 2005, pp 247-284
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Case
Jacob is managing Esther's assets with full power to sell them. One of the assets he holds on her behalf is an undeveloped piece of land called Blackacre.
Alternative 1
While exploring investment possibilities for Esther, Jacob learns that the zoning rules for the area that includes Blackacre are likely to change in a way that will make land in that area more valuable. A month before the change is announced, Jacob uses his own money to buy Greenacre, an undeveloped piece of land in the same area. When the zoning change is announced, the value of both Blackacre and Greenacre increases by 100 per cent. When Esther becomes aware of what has happened, she seeks an amount corresponding to the increased value of Greenacre from Jacob. She claims that this increase is a wrongful gain from a transaction that created a conflict of interest and duty, since Jacob's duty involves using the information he acquires in managing Esther's assets for her benefit and not for his own gain. Will Esther's claim succeed?
Alternative 2
Jacob owns Greenacre, an undeveloped piece of land in the same area as Blackacre, in his personal capacity. Jacob sells Blackacre to Bill, a member of the zoning board responsible for the planning of the district including both Blackacre and Greenacre. The transaction is at market value.
Case 11 - Securitisation
-
- By Georg Graf, Professor of Private Law, University of Salzburg, Austria, Monika Hinteregger, Professor of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Manuela Weissenbacher, Assistant to the Chair of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Benoit Allemeersch, Doctoral researcher Catholic, University of Leuven, Belgium; Attorney-at-Law bar of Brussels, Belgium, Alain Verbeke, Professor of Private and Comparative Law, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Merete Clausen, Attorney-at-Law, Denmark, Lionel Smith, Professor of Law, McGill University Canada, Jarmo Tuomisto, Professor of Civil Law, University of Turku, Finland, François Barrière, Junior Professor, University of Paris II, France, Stefan Grundmann, Professor of Private Law European and International Private and Business Law, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, George K. Lekkas, Attorney-at-Law, Athens, Greece, Niamh Moloney, Professor of Capital Markets Law, University of Nottingham, England, Eoin O'Dell, Fellow, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Antonio Gambaro, Professor of Comparative Private Law, State University of Milan, Italy, Michele Graziadei, Professor of Comparative Private Law, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy, Steve Jacoby, Partner Kremer Associés & Clifford Chance; Lecturer, University of Luxembourg, Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Attorney-at-Law Houthoff Buruma, NV, Amsterdam the Netherlands, Pedro Pais de Vasconcelos, Professor, University of Lisbon, Portugal, George L. Gretton, Lord President Reid Professor of Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Sergio Cámara Lapuente, Professor of Civil Law, University of La Rioja, Spain, Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of Private International Law, University of Barcelona, Spain, Torgny Håstad, Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and formerly Professor of Private Law, Uppsala University, Sweden
- Edited by Michele Graziadei, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro, Ugo Mattei, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy, Lionel Smith, McGill University, Montréal
-
- Book:
- Commercial Trusts in European Private Law
- Published online:
- 22 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 November 2005, pp 505-532
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Case
A company, ABC Ltd, lends money on the security of mortgages/hypothecs on immovables. It now wishes to raise money in the financial markets. It wants to use its portfolio of secured loans as security for the transaction. The goals will be that ABC Ltd will not itself become liable on the transaction, and moreover that investors will not be adversely affected by any subsequent insolvency of ABC Ltd. How can the transaction be structured so as to isolate the portfolio of secured loans from the general business of ABC Ltd?
Discussion
AUSTRIA
There are only a few articles on securitisation in the Austrian literature, and no court decision at all. The following remarks therefore have only a preliminary character.
In principle, Austrian law provides all the legal instruments required to structure securitisation transactions. First, it will be necessary to set up a new company, a special purpose vehicle (SPV). In a second step, ABC Ltd shall transfer its secured loans to the SPV. In exchange for them, the SPV shall pay a certain sum to ABC Ltd. To raise the money necessary for this payment, the SPV shall issue bonds to investors. If those investors are the only creditors of the SPV, then the security of the claims assigned to the SPV will also secure the investors' claims. As there is no direct relationship between the investors and ABC Ltd, this company will not be liable for the SPV's debts towards the bondholders.
Case 6 - Tracing
-
- By Georg Graf, Professor of Private Law, University of Salzburg, Austria, Monika Hinteregger, Professor of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Manuela Weissenbacher, Assistant to the Chair of Civil Law, University of Graz, Austria, Benoit Allemeersch, Doctoral researcher Catholic, University of Leuven, Belgium; Attorney-at-Law bar of Brussels, Belgium, Alain Verbeke, Professor of Private and Comparative Law, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Merete Clausen, Attorney-at-Law, Denmark, Lionel Smith, James McGill Professor of Law, McGill University Montreal, Canada, Jarmo Tuomisto, Professor of Civil Law, University of Turku, Finland, François Barrière, Junior Professor, University of Paris II, France, Stefan Grundmann, Professor of Private Law European and International Private and Business Law, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany, George K. Lekkas, Attorney-at-Law, Athens, Greece, Niamh Moloney, Professor of Capital Markets Law, University of Nottingham, England, Eoin O'Dell, Fellow, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, Antonio Gambaro, Professor of Comparative Private Law, State University of Milan, Italy, Michele Graziadei, Professor of Comparative Private Law, University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy, Steve Jacoby, Partner Kremer Associés & Clifford Chance; Lecturer, University of Luxembourg, Marielle Koppenol-Laforce, Attorney-at-Law Houthoff Buruma, NV, Amsterdam the Netherlands, Pedro Pais de Vasconcelos, Professor, University of Lisbon, Portugal, George L. Gretton, Lord President Reid Professor of Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Sergio Cámara Lapuente, Professor of Civil Law, University of La Rioja, Spain, Cristina González Beilfuss, Professor of Private International Law, University of Barcelona, Spain, Torgny Håstad, Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and formerly Professor of Private Law, Uppsala University, Sweden
- Edited by Michele Graziadei, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo Avogadro, Ugo Mattei, Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy, Lionel Smith, McGill University, Montréal
-
- Book:
- Commercial Trusts in European Private Law
- Published online:
- 22 August 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 November 2005, pp 369-405
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Case
The facts are as in Case 5, except as detailed below. The following alternatives occur:
Alternative 1
Without authority, Roberto uses all of the money in Simon's account (€1,000) to buy a painting. When Simon learns of this, the market value of the painting has risen to €2,000. Roberto is still solvent. Simon wants to terminate the relationship and take the painting. Can he do this?
Alternative 2
The facts are the same as in Alternative 1. However, before Simon learns of the transaction the painting is destroyed. It is insured for its market value. By the time Simon learns of this, Roberto is personally insolvent. Simon wants to terminate the relationship and take the insurance claim. Can he do this?
Alternative 3
Without authority, Roberto buys a painting with all of the money in Simon's account (€1,000) and €1,000 of his own money. By the time Simon learns of this, the market value of the painting has fallen to €1,000 and Roberto is personally insolvent. Simon wants to terminate the relationship and take the painting. Can he do this?
Alternative 4
Roberto has an unsecured overdraft facility (revolving loan facility/line of credit) with his bank, in his personal capacity. He borrows €100,000 from this facility and uses it to buy a piece of land in his personal capacity. Later, without authority, he uses all of the money in Simon's account (€100,000) to pay the debt he owes to the bank.