Advocate General considers Hungarian company law restricting the transfer of operational headquarter to another Member State incompatible with EC law (Cartesio)
On 22 May 2008, Advocate General Maduro gave his Opinion in the Cartesio case (C-201/06). The Advocate General concluded that Hungarian company law violated the freedom of establishment guaranteed under Article 43 EC as it completely precluded the transfer of the operational headquarter of a Hungarian company to another Member States, without any grounds of justification.
Cartesio is a limited partnership constituted in accordance with Hungarian law and registered in Hungary. In November 2005, Cartesio asked the commercial court to record in the commercial register the transfer of its operational headquarters from Hungary to Italy, but wished to remain subject to Hungarian company law. The commercial court refused to conform to this request on the basis that such transfer was not allowed under Hungarian law. It stated that, in order to change its operational headquarters, Cartesio would first have to be dissolved in Hungary and then reconstituted under Italian law. Cartesio lodged appeal against the decision of the commercial court before the Court of Appeal of Szeged, which in turn, asked the ECJ whether the Hungarian legislation at issue was compatible with the freedom of establishment, in addition to several questions concerning Article 234 EC.(...)
Cartesio is a limited partnership constituted in accordance with Hungarian law and registered in Hungary. In November 2005, Cartesio asked the commercial court to record in the commercial register the transfer of its operational headquarters from Hungary to Italy, but wished to remain subject to Hungarian company law. The commercial court refused to conform to this request on the basis that such transfer was not allowed under Hungarian law. It stated that, in order to change its operational headquarters, Cartesio would first have to be dissolved in Hungary and then reconstituted under Italian law. Cartesio lodged appeal against the decision of the commercial court before the Court of Appeal of Szeged, which in turn, asked the ECJ whether the Hungarian legislation at issue was compatible with the freedom of establishment, in addition to several questions concerning Article 234 EC.(...)
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário