The Bundesgerichtshof (BGH), in its judgment of 16 July 2024 (case II ZR 71/23, Martin Kind/Hannover 96), once again addressed the issue of shareholders’ resolutions adopted in derogation of the articles of association. The Court reaffirmed the traditional distinction be-tween the “ad hoc derogation” (punktuelle Satzungsdurchbrechung) and the “constitutive derogation” (zustandsbegründende Satzungsdurchbrechung), and, for the first time, provided criteria for distinguishing between these two types of statutory derogations. Regarding the limited liability company (GmbH), the Court held that an ad hoc derogation is valid even if it does not comply with the formal requirements prescribed for amendments to the articles of association. As for the joint-stock company (AG), it can be inferred that there is no obligation to register a derogating resolution with the commercial register. The German experience thus offers an opportunity to reflect on the validity of an “occasional derogation” in the Ital-ian legal system as well. KEYWORDS: derogation of the articles of association; occasional derogation; permanent derogation
La Corte Federale di Giustizia (Bundesgerichtshof- BGH) con la sentenza del 16 luglio 2024 (causa II ZR 71/23, Martin Kind/Hannover 96) interviene nuovamente sul trattamento delle delibere dei soci in deroga alle disposizioni statutarie. Pur riproponendo la tradizionale di-stinzione tra la «deroga puntuale» (c.d. punktuelle Satzungsdurchbrechung) e la «deroga con effetto costitutivo» (c.d. zustandsbegründende Satzungsdurchbrechung) fornisce per la prima volta alcuni criteri di riferimento per distinguere le due “tipologie” di deroghe statutarie. Viene affermata (per la s.r.l.) la validità della deroga, che regola un singolo caso “puntuale”, anche senza il rispetto dei requisiti formali richiesti per le modifiche statutarie, e per la s.p.a. sembra potersi desumere che non sussista l’obbligo di iscrivere nel registro la delibera in deroga. L’esperienza tedesca rappresenta l’occasione per prospettare alcune riflessioni sulla validità di una «deroga occasionale» anche nel nostro ordinamento.
“Scelte” dei soci e divergenza dalle regole statutarie: tra legittimità e limiti.
Mercedes Guarini
2025-01-01
Abstract
The Bundesgerichtshof (BGH), in its judgment of 16 July 2024 (case II ZR 71/23, Martin Kind/Hannover 96), once again addressed the issue of shareholders’ resolutions adopted in derogation of the articles of association. The Court reaffirmed the traditional distinction be-tween the “ad hoc derogation” (punktuelle Satzungsdurchbrechung) and the “constitutive derogation” (zustandsbegründende Satzungsdurchbrechung), and, for the first time, provided criteria for distinguishing between these two types of statutory derogations. Regarding the limited liability company (GmbH), the Court held that an ad hoc derogation is valid even if it does not comply with the formal requirements prescribed for amendments to the articles of association. As for the joint-stock company (AG), it can be inferred that there is no obligation to register a derogating resolution with the commercial register. The German experience thus offers an opportunity to reflect on the validity of an “occasional derogation” in the Ital-ian legal system as well. KEYWORDS: derogation of the articles of association; occasional derogation; permanent derogationI documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


