Make a Submission
Vol. 37 (2017)
General Articles

Insolvency Forum Shopping - What Can Be Learned from the ECJ and US Supreme Court Case Law on International Company Law and Insolvency Procedures?

PDF
  • Mirosława Myszke-Nowakowska
Mirosława Myszke-Nowakowska
Kancelaria radcy Prawnego Dr Mirosława Myszke-Nowakowska
okładka

Published 2017-12-31

Keywords

  • Centre of Main Interest,
  • company law,
  • European Court of Justice,
  • forum shopping,
  • insolvency,
  • US Supreme Court
    • ...More
    Less

Copyright (c) 2021 ILS PAS

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Insolvency Forum Shopping - What Can Be Learned from the ECJ and US Supreme Court Case Law on International Company Law and Insolvency Procedures? . (2017). Polish Yearbook of International Law, 37, 203-222. https://doi.org/10.7420/pyil2017i

Abstract

The recast of the European Insolvency Regulation, which has been applicable from 26 June 2017, implements a philosophy of Euro universalism, according to which insolvency proceedings opened in a Member State where the debtor has its centre of main interests (COMI) should have a universal scope and encompass all the debtor’s assets situated throughout the EU.

The wording of the Recast Regulation is intended to comply with the ECJ case law concerning COMI, such as Interedil, Eurofood, Bank Handlowy or Mediasucre judgments. Nevertheless, it is now questioned whether the Recast Regulation strengthens or rather weakens the COMI/registered office rebuttable presumption and opens the gate for insolvency forum shopping.

As far as international company law is concerned, the issue of transfer of seat as well as forum shopping has been widely discussed. So far the ECJ has issued a series of judgments in which it has explained the European freedom of establishment and the cross-border activities of companies in the internal market.

Similarly, the US Supreme Court has issued several signifcant decisions, such as CTP Corp. v. Dynamics Corp. of America, Edgar v. MITE Corp., and International Shoe Co. v. State of Washington, in which the limits of acceptable forum shopping are better delineated.

Based on the aforementioned, it may be concluded that European harmonization measures facilitating cross-border mobility should additionally assist in achieving predictability and efficiency, as well as the economic viability and security of the operations under consideration. This contribution analyses and expounds on the lessons that can be learned from both the ECJ case law as well as US Supreme Court’s decisions on international company law, including an examination of their effect on insolvency forum shopping. There is no doubt that, if successful, harmonized legislation on these matters would be a great asset for the internal market.

PDF

References

  1. Adler B., A theory of corporate insolvency, „New York University Law Review” 1997, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 343-382.
  2. Ayotte K., Skeel D., An Efficiency-Based Explanation for Current Corporate Reorganization Practice, „University of Chicago Law Review” 2006, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 425-468.
  3. Benabdallah M., de Wit R., Reinoud H., ECJ Disallows Immediate Collection of Tax Upon Migration, Baker & McKenzie –Nederlands, Client/Legal Alert, 5 December 2011.
  4. Cabral P., Cunha P., ‘Presumed Innocent’: Companies and the Exercise of the Right of Establishment under Community Law, „European Law Review” 2000, vol. 25, pp. 157-164.
  5. Carruthers J., Villiers C, Company Law in Europe – Condoning the Continental Drift?, „European Business Law Review” 2000, vol. 11, pp. 91–101.
  6. Case C-311/08 Société de Gestion Industrielle (SGI) v. Belgian State [2010], ECr I-48.
  7. Case Study 15: In re Nortel Networks Inc, 669 F3d 128 (3d Cir 2011), 29 December 2011.
  8. Commission Staff Working, Document Impact assessment on the Directive on the cross-border transfer of registered office, SEC(2007)1707, 12 December 2007.
  9. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Action Plan on Building a Capital Markets Union, COM/2015/0468 final, 30 September 2015.
  10. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Central Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Capital Markets Union - Accelerating Reform, COM/2016/0601 final, 14 September 2016.
  11. “Convergence of insolvency frameworks within the European Union – the way forward?”, Brussels Conference held on 12 July 2016, https://europa.eu/newsroom/events/convergence-insolvency-frameworks-within-european-union-way-forward_en [accessed 30 June 2018].
  12. Council Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 of 8 October 2001 on the Statute for a European company (SE), OJ L 294, 10 November 2001.
  13. Daniel D., Outbound Establishment Revisited in Cartesio, „EC Tax Review” 2008, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 250 – 258.
  14. Darke I., Use of US Chapter 11 Filings by Non-US Corporations; Realistic Option of Non-Starter, „International Corporate Rescue” 2011, vol. 8, no. 3.
  15. Davidenko S.A., Franks J. R., Do bankruptcy codes matter? A study of defaults in France, Germany and the U.K., „Journal of Finance” 2008, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 565-608.
  16. Davies P.L., Worthington S., Gower and Davies’ Principles of Modern company Law, Sweet & Maxwell, London 2012.
  17. Directive 2005/56/Ce of the Parliament and the Council of 26 October 2005, on cross-border mergers of limited liability companies, OJ L 294, 10 November 2001.
  18. Eidenmüller H., Abuse of Law in European Insolvency Law, „European Company Financial Law Review” 2009, vol. 1, pp. 1-28, https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/25813/1/oa_25813.pdf [accessed 06.07.2021].
  19. Eidenmüller H., Der Markt für internationale Konzerninsolvenzen: Zuständigkeitskonflikte unter der EuInsVO, „Neue juristische Wochenschrift” 2004, vol. 57, no. 48, pp. 3455-3458.
  20. Evers M., de Graaf A, Limiting Beneft Shopping: Use and Abuse of EC Law, „EC Tax Review” 2009, no. 6, pp. 279-298.
  21. Goode R., Principles of Corporate Insolvency Law, „Sweet & Maxwell”, London 2011.
  22. Hopt K. J., Droit compare des société: Quelques réflexions sur l’actualité et les evolutions comparés du droit allemand et du droit français des sociétés, „Revue des Sociétés” 2009, no 2, pp. 309-476.
  23. Hopt K., Europäisches Gesellschaftsrecht im Lichte des Aktionsplans der Europäischen Kommission vom Dezember 2012, „Zeitschrift für Unternehmensund Gesellschaftsrecht” 2013, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 166-175.
  24. Jakoby M.B., Fast, Cheap and Creditor-Controlled: Is Corporate Reorganization Failing?, „Buffalo Law Review” 2006, vol. 54, pp. 401-438, https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/buflr54&div=20&g_sent=1&casa_token=&collection=journals [accessed 06.07.2021].
  25. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 17 January 2006, Susanne Staubitz-Schreiber. Reference for a preliminary ruling: Bundesgerichtshof - Germany. Case C-1/04, ECLI:EU:C:2006:39.
  26. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 25 October 2017, Proceedings brought by Polbud - Wykonawstwo sp. z o.o. Case C-106/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:804.
  27. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 29 November 2011, National Grid Indus BV v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Rijnmond/kantoor Rotterdam. Case C-371/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:785.
  28. Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 10 July 1986, D. H. M. Segers v Bestuur van de Bedrijfsvereniging voor Bank- en Verzekeringswezen, Groothandel en Vrije Beroepen. Case 79/85, ECLI:EU:C:1986:308.
  29. Judgment of the Court of 9 March 1999, Centros Ltd v Erhvervs- og Selskabsstyrelsen. Case C-212/97, ECLI:EU:C:1999:126.
  30. Jung P., Vers une convergence des droits allemand et français des societiés?, „Revue Internationale de Droit Comparé” 2008, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 861-884.
  31. Kieninger E.-M., The Law Applicable to Corporations in the EC, „Rabels Zeitschrift” 2009, vol. 73, no. 3, pp. 607-628.
  32. Kreuzer K., Zu Stand und Perspektiven des europäischen Internationalen Privatrechts, Wie europäisch soll das Europäische Internationale Privatrecht sein?, „Rabels Zeitschrift” 2006, vol. 70, pp. 79—81.
  33. Latella D., The “COMI” Concept in the Revision of the European Insolvency Regulation, „European Company and Financial Law Review” 2014, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 479–494.
  34. Lombardo S., Regulatory Competition in Company Law in the European Union after Cartesio, „European Business Organization Law Review” 2009, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 627 – 648.
  35. LoPucki L.M., Courting Failure: How Competition for Big Cases is Corrupting the Bankruptcy Courts, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor 2005.
  36. Mathisen G., Consistency and coherence as conditions for justifcation of Member States measures restricting free movement, „Common Market Law Review” 2010, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 1021-1048.
  37. McCormack G., Bankruptcy Forum Shopping: The UK and US as Venues of Choice for Foreign Companies, „International & Comparative Law Quarterly” 2014, vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 815-842.
  38. McCormack G., Jurisdictional Competition and Forum Shopping in Insolvency Proceedings, „Cambridge Law Journal” 2009, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 169 – 197.
  39. McCormack G., Reforming the European Insolvency Regulation: A Legal and Policy Perspective, „Journal of Private International Law” 2014, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 41-67.
  40. Meeusen J., Freedom of Establishment, Conflict of Laws and the Transfer of a Company’s Registered Office: Towards Full Cross-Border Corporate Mobility in the Internal Market?, „Journal of Private International Law” 2017, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 294-323.
  41. Meeusen J., Myszke-Nowakowska M., International Company Law in the European Internal Market: Tree Decades of Judicial Activity, „Anuário brasileiro de direito internacional” 2016, vol. XI, no. 2, pp. 92-135.
  42. Meeusen J., System Shopping in European Private International Law in Family Matters, [in:] J. Meeusen, M. Pertegás, G. Straetmans & F. Swennen (eds.), International Family Law for the European Union, Intersentia, Antwerp 2007, pp. 239-278.
  43. Moss G., Group Insolvency – Choice of Forum and Law: The European Experience Under the Influence of English Pragmatism, „Brooklyn Journal of International Law” 2007, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 1005- 1018, https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1236&context=bjil [accessed 06.07.2021].
  44. Mucciarelli F.M., Freedom of Reincorporation and the Scope of Corporate Law in the US and the EU, „New York University Law and Economics Working Papers” 2011.
  45. Mucciarelli F.M., The unavoidable persistence of forum shopping in European insolvency law (November 2013), https://ssrn.com/abstract=2375654 [accessed 30 June 2018].
  46. Opinion of Advocate General Kokott delivered on 8 September 2011, National Grid Indus BV v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Rijnmond/kantoor Rotterdam. Case C-371/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:563.
  47. Pamboukis C., La renaissance-métamorphose de la méthode de reconnaissance, 97 „Revue Critique de Droit International Privé” 2008, vol. 97, no. 3, pp. 513-560.
  48. Parikh S., Modern Forum Shopping in Bankruptcy, „Connecticut Law Review” 2013, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 159-226, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/302394589.pdf [accessed 06.07.2021].
  49. Paschalis P., Freedom of Establishment and Private International Law for Corporations, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2012.
  50. Paulus Ch.G., A Statutory Proceeding for Restructuring Debts of Sovereign States, „Recht der Internationalen Wirtschaft” 2003, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 401.
  51. Paulus Ch.G., Global Insolvency Law and the Role of Multinational Institutions, „Brooklyn Journal of International Law” 2007, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 755-766, https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1228&context=bjil [accessed 06.07.2021].
  52. Pottow J.A.E., The Myth (and Realities) of Forum Shopping in Transnational Insolvency, „Brooklyn Journal of International Law” 2007, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 785-817, https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1230&context=bjil [accessed 06.07.2021].
  53. Rasmussen R.K., Where Are All the Transnational Bankruptcies? The Puzzling Case for Universalism, „Brooklyn Journal of International Law” 2007, vol. 32, no.3, pp. 983-1003, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/228601534.pdf [accessed 06.07.2021].
  54. Ribstein L., O’Hara E.A., Corporations and the market for law, „University of Illinois Law Review” 2008, vol. 661, 716-721.
  55. Ringe W.-G., Corporate Mobility in the European Union: A flash in the pan? An empirical study on the success of lawmaking and regulatory competition, „European Company and Financial Law Review” 2013, vol. 10 no. 2, pp. 230-267.
  56. Rome II Regulation 864/2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations, OJ L 199, 31 July 2007.
  57. Szydło M., Prevention of Forum Shopping in European Insolvency Law, „European Business Organization Law Review” 2010, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 253-272.
  58. Teichmann Ch., The Downside of Being a Letterbox Company, „European Company Law” 2012, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 180-184.
  59. The decision of the German Bundesgerichtshof, NJW 2689, 16 July 2007.
  60. The Global Competitiveness Index 2016-2017 (The World Economic Forum), https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2016-2017-1/
  61. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Amanda Acquisition Corp. v. Universal Foods Corp., 708 F. Supp. 984 (E.D. Wis. 1989), 18 March 1989.
  62. U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York - 303 B.R. 1 (S.D.N.Y. 2003), December 23, 2003.
  63. U.S. Supreme Court, CTS Corp. v. Dynamics Corp. of America, 481 U.S. 69 (1987), No. 86-71, 21 April 1987.
  64. U.S. Supreme Court, Edgar v. MITE Corp., 457 U.S. 624 (1982), No. 80-1188, 23 June 1982.
  65. U.S. Supreme Court, International Shoe v. State of Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945), No. 107, 3 December 1945.
  66. U.S. Supreme Court, United States v. Whiting Pools, Inc., 462 U.S. 198 (1983). No. 82-215, 8 June 1983.
  67. United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas, In re Yukos Oil Company, Debtor, 321 Br 396, 24 February 2005.
  68. United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit, in Re: William Neil Simon, Debtor. Hong Kong And Shanghai Banking Corporation, Limited, Plaintiff-Appellant, No. 96-16859, 153 F.3d 991, Bankr. L. Rep. (CCH) P77,783, 33 Bankr. Ct. Dec. 141, 98 Cal. Daily Op. Service 6641, 98 Daily Journal DAR 9261, 1998 U.S. App. Decision, 27 August 1998.
  69. US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit , Amanda Acquisition Corporation, Plaintiff-appellant/cross-appellee, v. Universal Foods Corporation, et al.,defendants-appellees/cross-appellants, 877 F.2d 496 (7th Cir. 1989), 24 May 1989.
  70. Warren E., Bankruptcy Policy, 54 „University of Chicago Law Review” 1987, vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 775-814.
  71. Warren E., Westbrook J.L., The Success of Chapter 11: A Challenge to the Critics, „Michigan Law Review” 2009, vol. 107, no. 4, pp. 603-641.
  72. Weller M.-P., Die Rechtsquellen des Gesellschaftskollisionsrechts, „IPrax” 2009, vol. 3, no. 202-209.
  73. Weller M.-P., Die Verlegung des Centre of Main Interest von Deutschland nach England, 37(6) „Zeitschrift für das gesamte Handels- und Gesellschaftsrecht”2008, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 835-866.
  74. Weller M.-P., Forum shopping im internationalen Insolvenzrecht?, „IPrax” 2004, vol. 412-417.
  75. Weller M.-P., The German Autonomous International Company Law, „IPrax” 2017, vol. 2, no. 167-177.
  76. Westbrook J. L., Locating the Eye of the Financial Storm, „Brooklyn Journal of International Law” 2007, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 1019-1040, https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1237&context=bjil [accessed 06.07.2021].

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.