Skip navigation

Zastosuj identyfikator do podlinkowania lub zacytowania tej pozycji: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12128/12323
Pełny rekord metadanych
DC poleWartośćJęzyk
dc.contributor.authorKlyta, Wojciech-
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-30T08:45:28Z-
dc.date.available2020-01-30T08:45:28Z-
dc.date.issued2019-
dc.identifier.citationProblemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego, 2019, t. 24, s. 47-75pl_PL
dc.identifier.issn2353-9852-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12128/12323-
dc.description.abstractThe claims are rights in personam but the assignment of claims has a hybrid nature. Abolishing the “nomina ossibus inhaerent” rule has increased commercial significance of the assignment of claims. However, the contemporary legal situation leaves parties with great legal uncertainty, as to the question under which circumstances does the cross — borders assignment is valid. A recent judgment of the CJEU of 9 October 2019 (C — 548/18) in case BGL BNP Paribas SA v. TeamBank AG Nürnberg has augmented this uncertainty. The Luxemburg Court ruled that: “Article 14 of the Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 (‘Rome I’) must be interpreted as not designating, directly or by analogy, the applicable law concerning the third-party effects of the assignment of a claim in the event of multiple assignments of the claim by the same creditor to successive assignees”. In this situation, one would highly welcome an attempt to establish a new set of conflict of laws rules relating to the law applicable to third — parties effects of the assignment of claims. This attempt has recently been made by the European Commission in its Report “on the question of the effectiveness of an assignment or subrogation of a claim against third parties and the priority of the assigned or subrogated claim over the right of another person”, dated 29 September 2016. In the present article, the author reviews the most important propositions formulated in the conflicts’ doctrine through the “lens” of the international insolvency law. Multiply provisions of the Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings (recast) — despite many judgments of the CJEU in this area — also lack certainty. Insolvency is a foreseeable risk, but without clear rules concerning the third parties’ effects of the assignment of claims, it may become unenforceable for the creditors of the assignor.pl_PL
dc.language.isoplpl_PL
dc.rightsUznanie autorstwa-Na tych samych warunkach 3.0 Polska*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/pl/*
dc.subjectassignmentpl_PL
dc.subjectRome Regulationpl_PL
dc.subjectlocation of the claimpl_PL
dc.subjectInsolvency Regulationpl_PL
dc.subjectpropertypl_PL
dc.subjectcenter of main interest of the debtorpl_PL
dc.subjectdetrimental actspl_PL
dc.subjectrights in rempl_PL
dc.titlePrawo właściwe dla skutków przelewu wierzytelności w stosunku do osób trzecich. Uwagi z perspektywy międzynarodowego prawa upadłościowegopl_PL
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlepl_PL
dc.identifier.doi10.31261/PPPM.2019.24.03-
Pojawia się w kolekcji:Artykuły (WPiA)

Pliki tej pozycji:
Plik Opis RozmiarFormat 
Klyta_Prawo_wlasciwe_sla_skutkow_przelewu_wierzytelnosci_w_stosunku_do_osob_trzecich.pdf598,79 kBAdobe PDFPrzejrzyj / Otwórz
Pokaż prosty rekord


Uznanie autorstwa na tych samych warunkach 3.0 Polska Creative Commons Creative Commons