Vol 14 (2017) - Issue 2

Article preview

On the Delimitation of the Concept of ‘Insolvency Matter’ in the CJEU’s Case Law: Special Reference to Director Liability Claims

I. Introduction
The definition of 'insolvency matter' has to this day kept the CJEU busy since its first judgment in the Gourdain case. If in that first decision the Court ruled that the notion includes actions that "must derive directly from bankruptcy or winding-up and be closely connected with proceedings for the 'liquidation des biens' or the 'reglement judiciare'", in its decision in Case C-295/13 the CJEU went a step further by stating that the same action can be an insolvency matter or not depending on whether at the time of bringing the same, insolvency proceedings had been opened or not.
The following pages examine the CJEU’s case law in order to try to string together a concept of 'insolvency matter' that meets the requirements set out by the Court and the appropriateness, or otherwise, of this trend towards extending this concept as evidenced by the case law (II.1). Following this, this paper will examine the limits and scope that the CJEU confers to the vis attractiva concursus (II.2), the exclusive nature of jurisdiction (III), whether the same criteria are applied where the judge hearing a particular action is the judge of territorial insolvency proceedings (IV) and it will also try to answer the question that naturally arises: whether the characterisation of an ‘insolvency matter’, as provided by the CJEU within the scope of international jurisdiction, should be extended to the scope of applicable or governing law and the consequences of the CJEU’s recent decision in case C-594/14 (V). While the issue is approached from a general perspective, special attention is devoted to claims seeking that directors of the insolvent company be found liable (II.3). Lastly, the conclusions reached are briefly presented (VI).