Activities of Jean-Marie CAVADA related to 2018/0044(COD)
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (5)
Amendment 21 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) If assignees are not aware of the legal risk or choose to ignore it, they may face unexpected financial losses. Uncertainty about who has legal title over the claims assigned on a cross-border basis can have knock-on effects and deepen and prolong the impact of a financial crisis. If assignees decide to mitigate the legal risk by seeking specific legal advice, they will incur higher transaction costs not required for domestic assignments. If assignees are deterred by the legal risk and choose to avoid it, they may forego business opportunities and market integration may be reduced.
Amendment 22 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) This legal risk can also act as a deterrent. Assignees and assignors may choose to avoid it, thereby allowing business opportunities to pass. This lack of clarity does not therefore appear to be in line with the objective of market integration and the principle of free movement of capital enshrined in Articles 63 to 66 TFEU.
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Priority conflicts between assignees of the same claim may arise where the third-party effects of the assignment have been subject to the law of the assignor’s habitual residence in one assignment and to the law of the assigned claim in another assignment. In such cases, the law applicable to resolve the priority conflict should be the law applicable to the third- party effects of the assignment of the claim which has first become effective against third parties under its applicable law. Where assignment of both claims becomes effective against third parties at the same time, the law of the assignor’s habitual residence should prevail.
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The choice of law shall be made expressly in the assignment contract by an amendment to the contract of assignment or by a separate agreement with the same purpose and concluded between the same parties. The substantive and formal validity of the act whereby the choice of law was made shall be governed by the chosen law.
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. A priority conflict between assignees of the same claim where the third-party effects of one of the assignments are governed by the law of the country in which the assignor has its habitual residence and the third-party effects of other assignments are governed by the law of the assigned claim shall be governed by the law applicable to the third- party effects of the assignment of the claim which first became effective against third parties under its applicable law. Where assignment of both claims becomes effective against third parties at the same time, the law of the country in which the assignor’s habitual residence is situated shall prevail.