CANCELLATION AND TERMINATION OF COMPANIES UNDER THE LIGHT
OF THE THREE TWIN JUDJEMENTS OF 2010:
THE DEAD CAN STILL REVIVE (ALBEIT ONLY FOR PROPERLY DIE)?

Cancellation and termination of companies under the light of the three twin judjements of 2010: the dead can still revive (albeit only for properly die?)

Under the light of the principles recently stated by the United Section of the Supreme Court of Cassation it can be considered now acquired that the cancellation of a company implies the definitive and irreversible termination of the same both in case of contingent liabilities and of possible passive survivals, given the existence of an express rule which states that the dissatisfied creditors of the company can enforce their rights against the shareholders and the liquidators. Different is the case of the active survivals (and of the possible contingent) (and of the ongoing trials).

Download pdfDOWNLOAD THE .PDF



THE JUDICIAL REVOCATION FOR CAUSE OF THE SOLE DIRECTOR
“SOCIO ACCOMANDATARIO” OF A “SOCIETÀ IN ACCOMANDITA SEMPLICE”
AND THE APPOINTMENT OF A JUDICIARY ADMINISTRATOR

The judical revocation for the cause of the sole director (socio accomandatario) of a (società in accomandita semplice) and the appointment of a judiciary administrator

The Publication draws on the contrast between two judicial decisions, the first issued by the Tribunal of Padova in 2003 and the second pronounced by the Tribunal of Milan in 2004, concerning the question whether it is possible to appoint a judiciary administrator in partnerships. On one side, any answer to the question cannot fail to take account of the influence that the new model of “SRL”, distinctly connoted in a more personalized shape, might have on partnerships and, on the other side, the solution adopted with reference to the possibility to appoint a judiciary administrator in partnerships could represent an interpretative criteria for the solution of the problem which occurs in not dissimilar terms under the legislation recently imposed for “SRL”. The Note was published on the Review “Giurisprudenza Commerciale”, 2005, II, pp. 662 ss.

Download pdfDOWNLOAD THE .PDF