According to the unanimous view in the literature on the AÜG, provisions under the AÜG are not applicable to managing directors. The Higher Social Court of Berlin-Brandenburg recently ruled that managing directors are subject to a statutory pension insurance due to an unauthorized temporary employment in accordance with the AÜG. Therefore, the question arises, whether and to what extent an employment of a managing director can nonetheless be affected by the AÜG.
The Federal Court of Justice [Bundesgerichtshof – BGH] commented on the admissibility of the furnishing of securities granted by companies in favor of their shareholders and on the so-called capital maintenance rules in AGs [Aktiengesellschaft – stock corporation] and GmbHs [Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung – limited liability companies]. Capital maintenance rules have an “indirect” effect […]
https://honert.de/wp-content/uploads/honert_logo_270px.png00Ester Hahnhttps://honert.de/wp-content/uploads/honert_logo_270px.pngEster Hahn2018-03-28 15:55:082019-09-03 16:40:03FURNISHING OF UPSTREAM SECURITIES – HERE IS WHAT MANAGING DIRECTORS SHOULD PAY ATTENTION TO
By order of 19 January 2017 (file reference: VII ZR 112/14), the Federal Court of Justice [Bundesgerichtshof – BGH] declared a private company limited by shares sued in Germany which was removed from the companies register in England (foundation state) incapable of being a party to proceedings. The order also gives occasion to analyze the […]
https://honert.de/wp-content/uploads/honert_logo_270px.png00Ester Hahnhttps://honert.de/wp-content/uploads/honert_logo_270px.pngEster Hahn2018-03-28 15:50:202018-04-05 15:14:21LOSS OF PROCEDURAL CAPACITY OF A PRIVATE COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES SUED IN GERMANY
Compliance clauses are nowadays a standard component of many (framework) supply agreements between companies. When introducing these clauses into contract negotiations, they are often extremely one-sided and present a high risk for the clause addressee. The following article demonstrates approaches and arguments which can help to achieve a proper limitation of a compliance clause.
Management participation programs have always been in the spotlight of tax authorities, as in those cases a distinction has to be made between fully taxable wages and tariff-favored income from capital investment. Tax authorities have particularly classified leaver provisions as a decisive indication for the existence of wage. However, the Federal Court of Finance (BFH) […]
https://honert.de/wp-content/uploads/honert_logo_270px.png00Ester Hahnhttps://honert.de/wp-content/uploads/honert_logo_270px.pngEster Hahn2018-03-28 15:40:282018-04-05 15:14:55WAGE? – NEW CASE LAW ON MANAGEMENT PARTICIPATION PROGRAMS
The Federal Court of Justice [Bundesgerichtshof – BGH] has consistently extended the analogous applicability of the provisions under corporate law to Limited Partnerships with Many Members of the Public as Limited Partners [Publikums-Personengesellschaften] (hereinafter “Publicly Held Partnership”). However, it has so far not been decided by the BGH, whether the special audit in accordance with […]
https://honert.de/wp-content/uploads/honert_logo_270px.png00Ester Hahnhttps://honert.de/wp-content/uploads/honert_logo_270px.pngEster Hahn2018-03-28 15:35:482018-04-05 15:15:11SPECIAL AUDIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH GERMAN STOCK CORPORATION LAW IN LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS WITH MANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AS LIMITED PARTNERS?
DOES THE GERMAN TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT ACT [“ARBEITNEHMERÜBERLASSUNGSGESETZ” – AÜG] APPLY TO MANAGING DIRECTORS?
/in 2018 Q2/by Ester HahnAccording to the unanimous view in the literature on the AÜG, provisions under the AÜG are not applicable to managing directors. The Higher Social Court of Berlin-Brandenburg recently ruled that managing directors are subject to a statutory pension insurance due to an unauthorized temporary employment in accordance with the AÜG. Therefore, the question arises, whether and to what extent an employment of a managing director can nonetheless be affected by the AÜG.
FURNISHING OF UPSTREAM SECURITIES – HERE IS WHAT MANAGING DIRECTORS SHOULD PAY ATTENTION TO
/in 2018 Q1/by Ester HahnThe Federal Court of Justice [Bundesgerichtshof – BGH] commented on the admissibility of the furnishing of securities granted by companies in favor of their shareholders and on the so-called capital maintenance rules in AGs [Aktiengesellschaft – stock corporation] and GmbHs [Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung – limited liability companies]. Capital maintenance rules have an “indirect” effect […]
LOSS OF PROCEDURAL CAPACITY OF A PRIVATE COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES SUED IN GERMANY
/in 2018 Q1/by Ester HahnBy order of 19 January 2017 (file reference: VII ZR 112/14), the Federal Court of Justice [Bundesgerichtshof – BGH] declared a private company limited by shares sued in Germany which was removed from the companies register in England (foundation state) incapable of being a party to proceedings. The order also gives occasion to analyze the […]
COMPLIANCE CLAUSES WITHIN SUPPLY CHAINS
/in 2018 Q1/by Ester HahnCompliance clauses are nowadays a standard component of many (framework) supply agreements between companies. When introducing these clauses into contract negotiations, they are often extremely one-sided and present a high risk for the clause addressee. The following article demonstrates approaches and arguments which can help to achieve a proper limitation of a compliance clause.
WAGE? – NEW CASE LAW ON MANAGEMENT PARTICIPATION PROGRAMS
/in 2018 Q1/by Ester HahnManagement participation programs have always been in the spotlight of tax authorities, as in those cases a distinction has to be made between fully taxable wages and tariff-favored income from capital investment. Tax authorities have particularly classified leaver provisions as a decisive indication for the existence of wage. However, the Federal Court of Finance (BFH) […]
SPECIAL AUDIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH GERMAN STOCK CORPORATION LAW IN LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS WITH MANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AS LIMITED PARTNERS?
/in 2018 Q1/by Ester HahnThe Federal Court of Justice [Bundesgerichtshof – BGH] has consistently extended the analogous applicability of the provisions under corporate law to Limited Partnerships with Many Members of the Public as Limited Partners [Publikums-Personengesellschaften] (hereinafter “Publicly Held Partnership”). However, it has so far not been decided by the BGH, whether the special audit in accordance with […]