Actio Pauliana And Divisions (IGI v Cicenia, C-394/18): Not Everything That Is Done, Is Well Done

N. de Luca
{"title":"Actio Pauliana And Divisions (IGI v Cicenia, C-394/18): Not Everything That Is Done, Is Well Done","authors":"N. de Luca","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3546781","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With IGI v Cicenia C 394/18, a decision of Jan. 30th, 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union has solved questions concerning an action to set aside a division (so-called actio pauliana). The Court holds that neither the objection possibility granted before the division is implemented, nor the rules establishing the cases in which “nullity” of a division may be declared preclude creditors from bringing an actio pauliana, in cases where this is appropriate. Indeed, such an action does not affect the validity of a division but merely allows for that division to be rendered unenforceable against the acting creditors. The note, after summarizing the facts, the background debate and the reasoning of the CJEU, marks that an actio pauliana is aimed at reversing the effects of the asset transfer, not at causing the recipient company to cease to exist. Also, it underlines that the joint and several liability of the recipient companies is not equivalent to an action to set aside the division. Unless EU law would not consider creditor protection and grant them at least the right to request adequate guarantees, in case the division affects them negatively.","PeriodicalId":269732,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Issues in Debtor-Creditor Relations (Topic)","volume":"145 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Issues in Debtor-Creditor Relations (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3546781","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

With IGI v Cicenia C 394/18, a decision of Jan. 30th, 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union has solved questions concerning an action to set aside a division (so-called actio pauliana). The Court holds that neither the objection possibility granted before the division is implemented, nor the rules establishing the cases in which “nullity” of a division may be declared preclude creditors from bringing an actio pauliana, in cases where this is appropriate. Indeed, such an action does not affect the validity of a division but merely allows for that division to be rendered unenforceable against the acting creditors. The note, after summarizing the facts, the background debate and the reasoning of the CJEU, marks that an actio pauliana is aimed at reversing the effects of the asset transfer, not at causing the recipient company to cease to exist. Also, it underlines that the joint and several liability of the recipient companies is not equivalent to an action to set aside the division. Unless EU law would not consider creditor protection and grant them at least the right to request adequate guarantees, in case the division affects them negatively.
保利亚纳的行动和分裂(IGI诉西塞尼亚,C-394/18):不是每件事都做得好
在2020年1月30日的IGI v Cicenia C 394/18号决定中,欧盟法院解决了有关撤销分割的行动(所谓的actio pauliana)的问题。本院认为,在分割实施前准许反对的可能性,以及确定可宣布分割“无效”的案件的规则,均不妨碍债权人在适当的情况下提起保证人诉讼。事实上,这样的诉讼并不影响分割的有效性,而只是允许该分割对代理债权人无效。在总结了事实、背景辩论和欧洲法院的推理后,该说明表明,保证人诉讼的目的是扭转资产转让的影响,而不是使接收公司不复存在。此外,它还强调,接收公司的连带责任并不等同于撤销分割的诉讼。除非欧盟法律不会考虑债权人保护,并至少给予他们要求充分担保的权利,以防分割对他们产生负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信