2013 will herald some significant changes to the UK legal arena, notably in the corporate area in relation to executive remuneration and narrative reporting, in dispute resolution as the Government's reforms to the civil litigation costs and funding regime are due to be implemented and in the energy, real estate and construction areas where there are major changes to the carbon reduction commitment energy efficiency scheme, further amendments to the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations, the introduction of the Growth and Infrastructure Bill and various amendments to the Building Regula

EIOPA has published the outcome of its November 2011 consultation on draft Guidelines for Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA). ORSA is an internal risk management tool aimed at capturing and dealing with all risks that might impact on a (re)insurance company’s solvency. ORSA processes need to be proportionate and tailored to fit the company’s structure and systems. This report by EIOPA focuses on its expectations about what ORSA should achieve rather than on how it should achieve it.

The transition from 2009 to 2010 sees some significant legislative chapters closing, notably the Companies Act 2006, Rome I and II, the Banking Act 2009 and the Lisbon Treaty.

Hogan Lovells Publications | 07 April 2020

Introduction of financial measures in support of businesses facing the Covid-19 crisis

Faced with the impact of the Covid-19 health crisis on the local and European economy, the President of the French Republic and the government announced several emergency measures in order to support businesses in difficulty.

PARLIB01/ZZZPARP/1030762.3 Hogan Lovells French Legal and Regulatory Update – May 2016 The Paris office of Hogan Lovells is pleased to provide this English language edition of our monthly e-newsletter, which offers a legal and regulatory update covering France and Europe for May 2016. Please note that French legal concepts are translated into English for information only and not as legal advice. The concepts expressed in English may not exactly reflect or correspond to similar concepts existing under the laws of the jurisdictions of the readers.

Das Oberlandesgericht München hat in einem bisher unveröffentlichten Hinweisbeschluss^[1] die Rechtsauffassung des Oberlandesgerichts Celle^[2] und des Oberlandesgerichts Düsseldorfs^[3] bestätigt, dass für Ansprüche des Insolvenzverwalters gegen Geschäftsführer wegen Zahlungen trotz Insolvenzreife kein Versicherungsschutz unter einer D&O-Versicherung besteht. Daneben hat das Oberlandesgericht München auch zur Verteilung der Darlegungs- und Beweislast in Abtretungskonstellationen Stellung bezogen.

Mit rechtskräftig gewordenem Urteil vom 06.03.2019 (Az. 5 O 234/17) hat das Landgericht Wiesbaden entschieden, dass es dem Insolvenzverwalter und allen versicherten Personen verwehrt ist, Versicherungsschutz für Inanspruchnahmen zu verlangen, die einer Versicherungsperiode zuzuordnen sind, für die der Insolvenzverwalter die Nichterfüllung des D&O-Versicherungsvertrags gewählt hat.

In a final ruling dated 6 March 2019 (Case ref.: 5 O 234/17), the Regional Court of Wiesbaden decided that the insolvency administrator and all insured persons are not entitled to claim insurance coverage for claims attributable to an insurance period for which the insolvency administrator has chosen not to fulfi l the D&O insurance contract.

Nach einem Urteil des OLG Düsseldorf vom 20. Juli 2018 (Az.: 4 U 93/16) soll sich der Deckungsschutz einer D&O-Versicherung nicht auf den Anspruch einer insolvent gewordenen Gesellschaft gegen ihren versicherten Vorstand oder Geschäftsführer auf Ersatz der nach Eintritt der Zahlungsunfähigkeit oder Überschuldung geleisteten Zahlungen erstrecken (§§ 92 Abs. 2 AktG, 64 GmbHG, 130a HGB). Die Rechtsprechung des OLG Düsseldorf gibt Anlass, bestehende D&O-Versicherungen einer Prüfung zu unterziehen bzw. nachzuverhandeln.

Der Sachverhalt

The Situation: Claims brought by insolvency administrators under Section 64 of the German Limited Liability Companies Act are not only among the most common, but also the most financially significant, claims faced by the directors of distressed German companies.

The Development: In a landmark decision, the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf recently determined that claims brought under Section 64 of the GmbHG are not covered by insuring provisions found in many D&O insurance policies.