法律研究

EU- Benchmark- Regulation

IBORs (Interbank Offered Rates) such as LIBOR, EURIBOR or TIBOR are interest rates for inter-bank loans. They are important benchmark interest rates, e.g. for loan agreements with a variable interest rate. IBORs are calculated by obtaining quotes from panel-banks. In the past, IBORs were subject to manipulations. As a reaction, the EU-Benchmark-Regulation established a framework which inter alia determines how IBORs shall be determined. The previous way of calculating benchmark interest rates are admissible only until 31.12.2019.

2019年9月20日

A substitute notification of a decision to the workplace

In a recent decision, the LVwG Tyrol dealt with the question of a substitute notification of a decision to the workplace of the recipient. A notification to the employer of the addressee is only deemed to have been received if the employer is a natural person. In the case the employer is a legal person, delivery as a recipient of a notification is excluded. This is true even if the recipient, as in this case, lives and works in a hotel. The substitute recipient was the receptionist (LVwG-2019/13 / 1053-1 dated 07.08.2019).

2019年9月6日

Implementation of the Shareholder‘ Rights Directive

In July, the so-called Shareholder’ Rights Directive was implemented in Austria. The directive aims at improving the engagement of shareholders and the exercise of their rights. Shareholders can engage in the remuneration of executives (“say – on – pay”) and in transactions with related parties (“related – party – transactions”). Shareholders must further be identified (“know – your – shareholder”) by so called intermediaries (investment firms, credit institutions, depositary service providers).

2019年8月9日

Changes to the register of the ultimate beneficial owners

The new Financial Adjustment Act (EU-Finanzanpassungsgesetz) eases the identification and verification of ultimate beneficial owners for banks. This is to be achieved by increasing the data quality in the register of ultimate beneficial owners (Register der wirtschaftlichen Eigentümer). Professional party representatives like attorneys-at-law may in the future voluntarily upload data to the register of the ultimate beneficial owners. In case of discrepancies between a customer’s information and the register of the ultimate beneficial owners, banks can set a grace period for their customers to clarify the discrepancies. After expiry of the grace period, a note about the discrepancies must be put in the register of the ultimate beneficial owners.

2019年7月26日

Cash-pooling-refund

The Supreme Court for Civil Matters recently ruled about (virtual) cash-pooling-contracts in connection with illegal refunds of capital contributions to shareholders. Cash-pooling-contracts aim at facilitating the planning and management of liquidity within a group. The admissibility of a cash-pooling-contract is among other reasons questionable, if there is foreseeable existential risk for the participating companies at the time of conclusion of the contract or if a participating company is prohibited to terminate the contract. The Supreme Court for Civil Matters has not specifically ruled on the admissibility of cash-pooling-contracts because the defendant was a third party. There is still no general obligation to inquire and assess about this issue for third parties, unless their suspicion is close to certainty (17Ob5/19p).

2019年6月27日