Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-05T02:26:55.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The European Private Company - Entering the Scene or Lost in Discussion?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Daniel Kornack

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

More than a year has passed since the European Commission introduced the European Private Company (Societas Privata Europaea, SPE) in June 2008. What has become of the draft statute? This paper is meant to give a short overview of its basic features, the other European institutions' discussions and statements, the problems that prevented the proposal from being adopted so far and possible solutions that were introduced.

Type
Developments
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 10 , Issue 8 , 01 August 2009 , pp. 1321 - 1332
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 For a comprehensive analysis of the Commission proposal, see Heinz Krejci, Societas Privata Europaea/SPE (2008) and the literature cited by Thomas Bücker, Die Organisationsverfassung der SPE, 173 Zeitschrift für das gesamte Handelsrecht und Wirtschaftsrecht 281, 285 n.13 (2009).Google Scholar

2 See Commission Proposal for a Council Regulation on the Statute for a European private company, COM(2008)396 final (June 25, 2008).Google Scholar

3 Modernising Company Law and Enhancing Corporate Governance in the European Union - A Plan to Move Forward, COM(2003)284 (May 21, 2003).Google Scholar

4 See Communication from the Commission To the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Think Small First. A Small Business Act for Europe, COM(2008)394 final (June 25, 2008).Google Scholar

5 Charlie McCreevy, Speech at the European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee (Oct. 3, 2007) (speech 592/07), available at http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/07/592. The aim of this directive was partly reached by the European Court of Justice's recent Cartesio judgment, Case C-210/06 CARTESIO Oktató és Szolgáltató bt (ECJ 16 December 2008); but see European Parliament resolution of 10 March 2009 with recommendations to the Commission on the cross-border transfer of the registered office of a company (2008/2196(INI)), Eur. Parl. Doc. P6-TA(2009)0086 (2009).Google Scholar

6 See Commission Staff Working Document accompanying the Proposal for a Council Regulation on the Statute of the European Private Company (SPE), at 5–6, SEC(2008)2098.Google Scholar

7 Articles not marked differently are those of the Commission's proposal for an SPE statute.Google Scholar

8 For further information on the function of model articles see Robert Drury, The European Private Company, 9 Eur. Bus. Org. L. Rev. 125, 132 (2008).Google Scholar

9 Example provisions for articles of association of an SPE, Council Register (12124/08) (July 23, 2008) (Commission).Google Scholar

10 Eur. Parl., Resolution with recommendations to the Commission on the European private company statute (2006/2013(INI)), Eur. Parl. Doc. P6_TA(2007)0023.Google Scholar

11 Eur. Parl., Legislative resolution of 10 March 2009 on the proposal for a Council regulation on the Statute for a European private company (COM(2008)0396 - C6-0283/2008 - 2008/0130(CNS)), Eur. Parl. Doc. P6_TA(2009)0094 (2009).Google Scholar

12 Eur. Parl., Comm. on Legal Affairs, Report on the proposal for a Council regulation on the Statute for a European private company (COM(2008)0396 - C6-0283/2008 - 2008/0130(CNS)), at 42, A6-0044/2009 (Feb. 4, 2009).Google Scholar

13 Id. at 44.Google Scholar

14 The original report of the Committee on Legal Affairs also allowed an SPE to comply with the cross-border requirement by having its registered office and its central administration or principal place of business in different Member States. On the other hand, it demanded subsidiaries instead of establishments in different Member States, id. at 14.Google Scholar

15 The reference in Amendment 21 to Art. 3 para. 1 point (eb) is due to differences between the Legal Affairs Committee's report and the final resolution. The report proposed an additional requirement to define a business object from a limited range of objects which was declined in the plenary.Google Scholar

16 Horst Eidenmüller, Andreas Engert & Lars Hornuf, Incorporating under European Law: The Societas Europaea as a Vehicle for Legal Arbitrage, 10 Eur. Bus. Org. L. Rev. 1, 22 (2009).Google Scholar

17 Council (EC), Progress Report on the Proposal for a Council Regulation on the statute for a European private company, at 3, No. 16400/1/08 Rev 1 (Nov. 28, 2008); but see the critical statement of the German Bundesrat, Drucksache (479/08) (Oct. 10, 2008).Google Scholar

18 COM(2008)396 final, supra note 2, at 3.Google Scholar

19 SEC(2008)2098, supra note 6, at 26; see Adriaan F. M. Dorresteijn & Odeaya Uziahu-Santcross, The Societas Privata Europaea under the Magnifying Glass (Part 1), 5 Eur. Company L. 277, 279–80 (2008) (questioning the necessity of a European instrument).Google Scholar

20 Hadding, Walther & Erik Kießling, Die Europäische Privatgesellschaft (Societas Privata Europaea), 63 Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Bankrecht 145, 147 (2009).Google Scholar

21 COM(2008)396 final, supra note 2, at 7.Google Scholar

22 A6-0044/2009, supra note 12, at 42.Google Scholar

23 COM(2008)396 final, supra note 2, at 7–8.Google Scholar

24 See Hommelhoff, Peter & Teichmann, Christoph, Eine GmbH für Europa: Der Vorschlag der EU-Kommission zur Societas Privata Europaea (SPE), 99 GmbHRundschau 897, 906 (2008); different Hadding & Kießling, supra note 20, at 149.Google Scholar

25 On the shortcoming of this attempt, see Peter Hommelhoff, Unternehmensfinanzierung in der Europäischen Privatgesellschaft, 173 Zeitschrift für das gesamte Handelsrecht und Wirtschaftsrecht 255, 264 n.38 (2009).Google Scholar

26 The application of this procedure to an SPE's formation was introduced during the discussions in the Legal Affairs Committee as a compromise to keep the minimum legal capital at a symbolic € 1 while trying to secure sufficient capitalization according to the needs of the respective company.Google Scholar

27 On the different functions of balance sheet tests and solvency tests, see Wolfgang Schön, Balance Sheet Tests or Solvency Tests - or Both?, 7 Eur. Bus. Org. L. Rev. 181 (2008)Google Scholar

28 Pablo Rüdiger S. de Erice & Gaude, Frank, Societas Privata Europaea - Unternehmensleitung und Haftung, DStR 857, 861 (2009).Google Scholar

29 A6-0044/2009, supra note 12, at 25.Google Scholar

30 Siems, Mathias, Erik Rosenhäger & Leif Herzog, Aller guten Dinge sind zwei: Lehren aus der Entwicklung der SE für die SPE, Der Konzern 393, 400 (2008).Google Scholar

31 For a detailed, critical analysis of the draft's system of employee participation see Peter Hommelhoff, Rüdiger Krause & Christoph Teichmann, Arbeitnehmer-Beteiligung in der Europäischen Privatgesellschaft (SPE) nach dem Verordnungsentwurf, 99 GmbHRundschau 1193 (2008).Google Scholar

32 Council Directive 2001/86 of 8 October 2001 Supplementing the Statute for a European company with regard to the involvement of employees, 2001 O.J. (L 294) 22.Google Scholar

33 Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council 2005/56 of 26 October 2005 on cross-border mergers of limited liability companies, 2005 O.J. (L 310) 1.Google Scholar

34 See Hommelhoff, , Krause & Teichmann, supra note 31, at 1195 (finding as a result of the ECJ's rulings on the freedom of establishment that this construction can already be used with any company form from another EU Member State).Google Scholar

35 On the interlinkage of these two Directives see Kisker, Olaf, Unternehmerische Mitbestimmung in der Europäischen Gesellschaft, der Europäischen Genossenschaft und bei grenzüberschreitender Verschmelzung im Vergleich, 59 Recht der Arbeit 206 (2006).Google Scholar

36 A6-0044/2009, supra note 12, at 44.Google Scholar

37 Id. Google Scholar

38 16400/1/08 Rev 1, supra note 17, at 2; Council (EC), ‘2910th meeting of the Council: Competitiveness (internal market, industry and research) Brussels, 1 and 2 December 2008’ (press release), No. 16577/08 (Dec. 1–2, 2008), at 10.Google Scholar

39 Council (EC), Proposal for a Council Regulation on the Statute for a European private company (SPE), No. 17152/08 (Dec. 11, 2008).Google Scholar

40 Council (EC), Proposal for a Council Regulation on the Statute for a European private company (SPE), No. 9065/09 (Apr. 27, 2009), not yet accessible.Google Scholar

41 Council (EC), Progress report on the Proposal for a Council Regulation on the statute for a European private company (SPE), No. 9658/09 (May 8, 2009), at 3.Google Scholar

42 16400/1/08 Rev 1, supra note 17, at 3.Google Scholar

43 Id. at 4.Google Scholar

44 Second Council Directive 77/91 of 13 December 1976 on the coordination of safeguards, 1977 O.J. (L 26) 1 (EEC).Google Scholar

45 9658/09, supra note 41, at 3.Google Scholar

46 9658/09, supra note 41, at 2–3.Google Scholar

47 Presidency, Swedish, Work programme for the Swedish Presidency of the EU. 1 July - 31 December 2009, at 32, available at http://www.se2009.eu/polopoly_fs/L6248!menu/standard/file/Work%20Programme%20for%20the%20Swedish%20Presidency%201%20July%20-%2031%20Dec%202009.pdf.Google Scholar

48 Swedish law entitles employees even in small companies (at least 25 employees) to elect representatives to the board of directors, see Lone L. Hansen & Erik Werlauff, Employee Representation on the Board of Directors of a Company with its Registered Office in a Nordic Country, 6 European Community Law 68, 71 (2009).Google Scholar

49 See Hommelhoff, Krause & Teichmann, supra note 31, at 1196.Google Scholar