dc.contributor.author Stander, Anita Leonie
dc.contributor.author Botha, S.J.
dc.identifier.citation Botha, S.J. & Stander, A.L. 2011. Die bepaling van die 'sentrum van hoofbelange' by oorgrens insolvensies: is die Parmalat-benadering voldoende om die behoeftes van moderne handel te bevredig? Journal for juridical science, 36(1):19-48. http://www.ufs.ac.za/templates/journals.aspx?journal=1] en_US
dc.description.abstract The determination of the ‘centre of main interests’ in cross-border insolvencies: Is the Parmalat approach sufficient to meet the needs of modern commerce? Despite various viewpoints on the determination of the centre of main interest (COMI), the legal question in this investigation is whether, and to what extent, the approach in In re Eurofood IFSC Ltd (the Parmalat case) brings about an effective solution for the determination of the location of the COMI of individual companies, either unattached or as part of a group (in contrast with companies forming a so called economic unit). There exists a presumption that the COMI is situated there where the company’s registered office is. This is the physical factor in determining the COMI. There is also a mental or psychological factor. The COMI must correspond with the place which third parties (including foreigners) regard as the place where the debtor ordinarily manages its business and most prominent interests on a regular basis. If the registered office is situated at one place and the judgment of third parties with regard to the COMI is elsewhere, the presumption will not come into operation and the ordinary onus of proof will rest on the party concerned. If the subsidiary’s registered office and the opinion of third parties point to the same location (in order for the presumption to come into operation) the holding company should lead more substantial evidence so as to rebut the presumption. The presumption shall not be rebutted easily. An essential and delicate process of weighing up relevant factors should take place. The COMI must be identified with reference to criteria which are objectively foreseeable by all parties involved. en_US
dc.description.abstract Ten spyte van verskeie standpunte oor die sentrum van hoofbelange (COMI), is die regsvraag in hierdie ondersoek of, en tot watter mate, die benadering in In re Eurofood IFSC Ltd (die Parmalat-saak) ’n effektiewe oplossing bied vir die vasstelling van die ligging van die COMI van individuele maatskappye, hetsy onverbonde of as deel van ’n groep (in teenstelling met die COMI van maatskappye wat ’n sogenaamde ekonomiese eenheid vorm). Daar bestaan ’n vermoede dat die COMI geleë is waar die maatskappy se geregistreerde kantoor is. Dit is die fisiese faktor in die bepaling van die COMI. Daar is ook ’n psigiese faktor. Die COMI moet ooreenstem met die plek wat derde partye (insluitende buitelanders) beskou as die plek waar die skuldenaar gewoonlik sy besigheid en mees prominente belange op ’n gereelde basis administreer. As die geregistreerde kantoor op een plek geleë is en die oordeel van derde partye ten opsigte van die COMI op ’n ander plek is, sal die vermoede nie in werking tree nie en die gewone bewyslas sal op die betrokke party rus. As die filiaal se geregistreerde kantoor en die opvatting van derde partye op die selfde plek dui (sodat die vermoede in werking tree), moet die houermaatskappy meer, beter en swaarder getuienis aanvoer om die vermoede te weerlê. Die vermoede sal egter nie sonder meer weerlê word nie. ’n Essensiële en delikate opwegingsproses van die relevante faktore moet plaasvind. Die COMI moet geïdentifiseer word met verwysing na kriteria wat objektief voorsienbaar is deur alle betrokke partye.
dc.title Die bepaling van die 'sentrum van hoofbelange' by oorgrens insolvensies: is die Parmalat-benadering voldoende om die behoeftes van moderne handel te bevredig? en_US
dc.contributor.researchID 10190465 - Stander, Anita Leonie