Abstract
This contribution deals with the rules on approval requirements in the European Insolvency Regulation Recast (EIR Recast) and argues that they are strengthening the role of the main insolvency proceedings. In many jurisdictions, current contracts of the debtor can be modified or terminated by the insolvency practitioner upon insolvency. In some jurisdictions, the modification or termination has to be approved by a court or a court-appointed supervisory judge. If the lex fori concursus does not contain the procedural rules to fulfil an approval requirement posed by the law applicable to the current contract in insolvency, an unintended regulatory gap exists. Articles 11(2) and 13(2) of the EIR Recast were introduced to solve this problem with regard to contracts relating to immoveable property and with regard to contracts of employment. Because the new provisions are reducing the need to open secondary proceedings, they are contributing to a more powerful role of the main insolvency proceedings.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Regulation (EC) 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings.
- 2.
Wessels 2011, p. 125.
- 3.
- 4.
Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings (recast).
- 5.
Fletcher 2015, p. 98.
- 6.
Leandro 2014, p. 47.
- 7.
McCormack 2016, p. 129.
- 8.
- 9.
Fletcher 2015, p. 99.
- 10.
- 11.
- 12.
Section 103—Option to be exercised by the Insolvency Administrator—Insolvency Statute: ‘(1) Ist ein gegenseitiger Vertrag zur Zeit der Eröffnung des Insolvenzverfahrens vom Schuldner und vom anderen Teil nicht oder nicht vollständig erfüllt, so kann der Insolvenzverwalter anstelle des Schuldners den Vertrag erfüllen und die Erfüllung vom anderen Teil verlangen.
(2) Lehnt der Verwalter die Erfüllung ab, so kann der andere Teil eine Forderung wegen der Nichterfüllung nur als Insolvenzgläubiger geltend machen. Fordert der andere Teil den Verwalter zur Ausübung seines Wahlrechts auf, so hat der Verwalter unverzüglich zu erklären, ob er die Erfüllung verlangen will. Unterläßt er dies, so kann er auf der Erfüllung nicht bestehen‘ and see Section 113 Insolvency Statute for employment contracts.
- 13.
Paulus 2017, p. 278.
- 14.
Veder 2011, p. 288.
- 15.
ArtÃculo 64—Contratos de trabajo—ley 22/2003, de 9 de julio, Concursal: ‘Los expedientes de modificación sustancial de las condiciones de trabajo y de suspensión o extinción colectiva de las relaciones laborales, una vez declarado el concurso, se tramitarán ante el juez del concurso por las reglas establecidas en el presente artÃculo.’
- 16.
GarcimartÃn 2015, p. 717.
- 17.
GarcimartÃn 2015, p. 716.
- 18.
Gössl 2018, p. 619.
- 19.
Gössl 2018, p. 619.
- 20.
Gössl 2018, pp. 622 et seq.
- 21.
See GarcimartÃn 2015, p. 716 for a similar example.
- 22.
This question is also asked by GarcimartÃn and Virgós 2016, p. 278.
- 23.
- 24.
- 25.
The Heidelberg-Luxembourg-Vienna Report on the Application of Regulation No. 1346/2000/EC on Insolvency Proceedings (External Evaluation JUST/2011/JCIV/PR/0049/A4) was presented by Hess B, Oberhammer P and Pfeiffer T in cooperation with Piekenbrock A and Seagon C in 2014.
- 26.
Piekenbrock 2014, p. 205, para 6.5.3: ‘Therefore, we come to the conclusion that the choice of law rule is appropriate to meet the underlying policy and recommend no amendments.’
- 27.
Pfeiffer 2014, p. 206, para 6.7.1.1: ‘Therefore, as a final conclusion in this respect, the General Reporters do not see differences in national labor laws as a sufficient reason for proposing an amendment of Article 10 EIR.’
- 28.
Pfeiffer 2014, p. 206, para 6.7.1.1.
- 29.
Pfeiffer 2014, p. 207, para 6.7.2.
- 30.
Article 10a proposal of the European Commission of 12.12.2012 (COM/2012/0744 final—2012/0360(COD)).
- 31.
Article 10a proposal of the European Commission of 12.12.2012 (COM/2012/0744 final—2012/0360(COD)).
- 32.
Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 05.02.2014 (P7_TC1-COD(2012)0360), OJÂ C 93, 24.3.2017, p. 366.
- 33.
Position No. 7/2015 of the Council at first reading (2015/C-141/01), OJ C 141, 28.4.2015, p. 1.
- 34.
- 35.
Undritz 2017, p. 2485, para 7.
- 36.
- 37.
Dornblüth 2018a, p. 2715, para 1.
- 38.
Snowden 2016, p. 264.
- 39.
- 40.
Kindler 2018a, p. 2066, para 11.
- 41.
Wenner and Schuster 2018a, p. 3517, para 2.
- 42.
Josko de Marx 2017, para 21.
- 43.
Mankowski 2016a, p. 253, para 44.
- 44.
Mankowski 2016a, p. 253, para 44 (‘Die eingesetzte Technik ist im kollisionsrechtlichen Sinne eine unionsrechtlich verordnete Substitution im Belegenheitsrecht.’).
- 45.
Gössl 2018, pp. 618 et seq.
- 46.
- 47.
Paulus 2017, p. 278.
- 48.
Wenner and Schuster 2018a, p. 3518, para 13.
- 49.
- 50.
Paulus 2017, p. 278.
- 51.
Regulation (EU) No. 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.
- 52.
Mankowski 2016a, p. 253, para 43.
- 53.
- 54.
GarcimartÃn and Virgós 2016, p. 274.
- 55.
- 56.
Liersch 2017, p. 289, para 17.
- 57.
- 58.
- 59.
Mankowski 2016b, p. 278, para 40 argues that the approval requirements of the Member State where a secondary proceeding could be opened are decisive, rather than the approval requirements of the law that governs the employment contract—if this is true a problem of adaptation does not exist because the law that governs the secondary proceeding does not apply in the main proceeding; for the decisiveness of the law that governs the employment contract, see Bork 2018b, para 16 and Paulus 2017, p. 290—the latter opinion is, however, problematic when the law that governs the contract of employment is not the law of the forum of the potential secondary proceeding. In that case, the same problem of adaptation can occur in the secondary proceeding, which might not necessarily have the same approval requirements as the law that governs the employment contract.
- 60.
GarcimartÃn and Virgós 2016, p. 278.
- 61.
- 62.
- 63.
Mankowski 2016b, p. 277, para 35.
- 64.
Mankowski 2016b, p. 277, para 35.
- 65.
Wenner and Schuster 2018b, p. 3522, para 8.
- 66.
Liersch 2017, p. 290, para 18.
- 67.
- 68.
Bork 2016, p. 153, para 4.96.
- 69.
Bork 2016, p. 153, para 4.96.
- 70.
Bork 2016, p. 149, para 4.84.
- 71.
- 72.
Snowden 2016, p. 266.
- 73.
Snowden 2016, p. 266.
References
Bork R (2016) Law Applicable. In: Bork R, Mangano R (eds) European Cross-Border Insolvency Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 115–166
Bork R (2017) The European Insolvency Regulation and the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency. International Insolvency Review 26:246–269
Bork R (2018a) Artikel 11 Vertrag über einen unbeweglichen Gegenstand. In: Kübler B et al (eds) InsO - Kommentar zur Insolvenzordnung, 77. Aktualisierung. RWS, Cologne, pp 1–7
Bork R (2018b) Artikel 13 Arbeitsvertrag. In: Kübler B et al (eds) InsO - Kommentar zur Insolvenzordnung, 77. Aktualisierung. RWS, Cologne, pp 1–8
Bork R, Harten J (2018) Die Niederlassung iSv Art. 2 Nr. 10 EuInsVO bei natürlichen Personen. Neue Zeitschrift für Insolvenz- und Sanierungsrecht 2018:673–680
Dornblüth S (2018a) Artikel 11 Vertrag über einen unbeweglichen Gegenstand. In: Kayser G, Thole C (eds) Heidelberger Kommentar zur Insolvenzordnung, 9th edn. C. F. Müller, Heidelberg, pp 2714–2716
Dornblüth S (2018b) Artikel 13 Arbeitsvertrag. In: Kayser G, Thole C (eds) Heidelberger Kommentar zur Insolvenzordnung, 9th edn. C. F. Müller, Heidelberg, pp 2718–2720
Fletcher I (2005) Insolvency in Private International Law, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Fletcher I (2015) The European Insolvency Regulation recast: the main features of the new law. Insolvency Intelligence 28:97–103
GarcimartÃn F (2015) The EU Insolvency Regulation Recast: Scope, Jurisdiction and Applicable Law. Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht 23:694–731
GarcimartÃn F, Virgós M (2016) Article 13 – Contracts of employment. In: Bork R, van Zwieten K (eds) Commentary on the European Insolvency Regulation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 274–279
Gössl S (2018) Anpassung im EU-Kollisionsrecht. Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 82:618–653
Josko de Marx A (2017) Art. 11 Vertrag über einen unbeweglichen Gegenstand. In: Braun E (ed) Insolvenzordnung (InsO), 7th edn. C.H. Beck, Munich
Kindler P (2018a) Art. 11 EuInsVO Vertrag über einen unbeweglichen Gegenstand. In: Säcker F et al (eds) Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch, Band 12, 7th edn. C.H. Beck, Munich, pp 2063–2066
Kindler P (2018b) Art. 13 EuInsVO Arbeitsvertrag. In: Säcker F et al (eds) Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch, Band 12, 7th edn. C.H. Beck, Munich, pp 2069–2072
Leandro A (2014) Strengthening the Dominance of Main Proceedings: From Bank Handlowy to the Revision of the European Insolvency Regulation. In: Bariatti S, Omar P (eds) The Grand Project: Reform of the European Insolvency Regulation. INSOL Europe, Nottingham/Paris, pp 47–57
Liersch O (2017) Artikel 13 Arbeitsvertrag. In: Vallender H (ed) EuInsVO – Kommentar zur Verordnung (EU) 2015/848 über Insolvenzverfahren. RWS, Cologne, pp 285–290
Looschelders D (2019) Einleitung zum Internationalen Privatrecht. In: Henrich D (ed) J von Staudingers Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz und Nebengesetzen, 2019. Sellier – de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 1–511
Mankowski P (2016a) Art. 11 Vertrag über einen unbeweglichen Gegenstand. In: Mankowski P et al (eds) Europäische Insolvenzverordnung 2015 – Kommentar, 1st edn. C.H. Beck, Munich, pp 241–254
Mankowski P (2016b) Art. 13 Arbeitsvertrag. In: Mankowski P et al (eds) Europäische Insolvenzverordnung 2015 – Kommentar, 1st edn. C.H. Beck, Munich, pp 265–278
McCormack G (2016) Something Old, Something New: Recasting the European Insolvency Regulation. The Modern Law Review 79:121–146
Moss G (2014) Master and Servant? Relationship between Main and Territorial Proceedings in Light of Bank Handlowy (Case C-116/11). In: Bariatti S, Omar P (eds) The Grand Project: Reform of the European Insolvency Regulation. INSOL Europe, Nottingham/Paris, pp 11–16
Mucciarelli F (2016) Private International Law Rules in the Insolvency Regulation Recast: A Reform or a Restatement of the Status Quo? European Company and Financial Law Review 13:1–30
Paulus C (2017) EuInsVO - Europäische Insolvenzverordnung, 5th edn. Fachmedien Recht und Wirtschaft, dfv Mediengruppe, Frankfurt am Main
Pfeiffer T (2014) Article 10 EIR: Employment Contracts. In: Hess B et al (eds) European Insolvency Law – The Heidelberg-Luxembourg-Vienna Report on the Application of Regulation No. 1346/2000/EC on Insolvency Proceedings (External Evaluation JUST/2011/JCIV/PR/0049/A4). C. H. Beck/Hart/Nomos, Munich/Oxford/Baden-Baden, pp 206–208
Piekenbrock A (2014) Article 8 EIR: Contracts Relating to Immoveable Property. In: Hess B et al (eds) European Insolvency Law – The Heidelberg-Luxembourg-Vienna Report on the Application of Regulation No. 1346/2000/EC on Insolvency Proceedings (External Evaluation JUST/2011/JCIV/PR/0049/A4). C. H. Beck/Hart/Nomos, Munich/Oxford/Baden-Baden, pp 204–205
Reinhart S (2016a) Art. 8 Vertrag über einen unbeweglichen Gegenstand. In: Kirchhof H et al (eds) Münchener Kommentar zur Insolvenzordnung, 3rd edn. C. H. Beck, Munich, pp 137–142
Reinhart S (2016b) Art. 13 Arbeitsvertrag. In: Kirchhof H et al (eds) Münchener Kommentar zur Insolvenzordnung, 3rd edn. C. H. Beck, Munich, pp 424–425
Snowden R (2016) Article 11 – Contracts relating to immoveable property. In: Bork R, van Zwieten K (eds) Commentary on the European Insolvency Regulation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 264–266
Undritz S (2017) Art. 8 Vertrag über einen unbeweglichen Gegenstand. In: Schmidt A (ed) Hamburger Kommentar zum Insolvenzrecht, 6th edn. Carl Heymanns, Cologne, pp 2484–2485
Veder M (2011) The Future of the European Insolvency Regulation – Applicable law, in particular security rights. International Insolvency Law Review 2:285–297
Wenner C, Schuster M (2018a) Artikel 11 Vertrag über einen unbeweglichen Gegenstand. In: Wimmer K (ed) Frankfurter Kommentar zur Insolvenzordnung mit EuInsVO, InsVV und weiteren Nebengesetzen, 9th edn. Luchterhand, Cologne, pp 3516–3518
Wenner C, Schuster M (2018b) Artikel 13 Arbeitsvertrag. In: Wimmer K (ed) Frankfurter Kommentar zur Insolvenzordnung mit EuInsVO, InsVV und weiteren Nebengesetzen, 9th edn. Luchterhand, Cologne, pp 3520–3522
Wessels B (2008) Cross-Border Insolvency Law in Europe: Present Status and Future Prospects. Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal 11:68–102
Wessels B (2011) Amending the EU Insolvency Regulation: Shaken or Stirred? In: Parry R (ed) The Reform of International Insolvency Rules at European and National Level. INSOL Europe, Nottingham/Paris, pp 125–135
Wessels B (2014) Courts should be Leading in Solving Cross-Border Insolvency Matters. In: Bariatti S, Omar P (eds) The Grand Project: Reform of the European Insolvency Regulation. INSOL Europe, Nottingham/Paris, pp 23–31
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 T.M.C. Asser press and the authors
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Harten, J. (2020). Jurisdictional Rules on Approval Requirements in the European Insolvency Regulation Recast. In: Lazić, V., Stuij, S. (eds) Recasting the Insolvency Regulation. Short Studies in Private International Law . T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-363-4_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-363-4_3
Published:
Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague
Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-362-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-363-4
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)