Kamer van Koophandel v Inspire Art Ltd
   HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

''Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken voor Amsterdam v Inspire Art Ltd'' (2003) C-167/01 is a leading corporate law case, concerning the
EU law European Union law is a system of rules operating within the member states of the European Union (EU). Since the founding of the European Coal and Steel Community following World War II, the EU has developed the aim to "promote peace, its val ...
of freedom of establishment for companies.


Facts

The art company "Inspire Art Ltd" claimed that the Dutch law requirement for a minimum capital to operate in the Netherlands was an unjustified restriction on its right to freedom of establishment (now under
TFEU The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is one of two treaties forming the constitutional basis of the European Union (EU), the other being the Treaty on European Union (TEU). It was previously known as the Treaty Establishi ...
article 49). The company was incorporated in the United Kingdom, which accords to the "incorporation theory" rather than the "real seat theory" of establishing a business in conflict of laws. It wished to carry out business in the Netherlands, running an
Amsterdam Amsterdam ( , , , lit. ''The Dam on the River Amstel'') is the capital and most populous city of the Netherlands, with The Hague being the seat of government. It has a population of 907,976 within the city proper, 1,558,755 in the urban ar ...
art studio. Dutch law, however, applied to pseudoforeign companies to impose minimum capital requirements on businesses operating within the country. When the Dutch authorities required the company to comply with Dutch law, the question was whether that disproportionately interfered with Inspire Art Ltd's right to freedom of establishment.


Judgment

The Court of Justice held that creditor protection did not justify imposing additional requirements to those of the United Kingdom, where Inspire Art Ltd was incorporated. In this case, creditors were sufficiently protected by the fact that the company held itself out not as a Dutch company but one subject to UK law. The minimum capital requirements were a disproportionate method of achieving the aim of creditor protection.


See also

{{Clist co establishment *
UK company law The United Kingdom company law regulates corporations formed under the Companies Act 2006. Also governed by the Insolvency Act 1986, the UK Corporate Governance Code, European Union Directives and court cases, the company is the primary lega ...
*
European company law European company law is a part of European Union law, which concerns the formation, operation and insolvency of companies (or corporations) in the European Union. The EU creates minimum standards for companies throughout the EU, and has its own co ...
;US cases *'' Liggett v. Lee'' 288 U.S. 517 (1933)


References

*M Andenas, 'Free Movement of Companies' (2003) 119 LQR 221 *P Dyrberg, 'Full Free Movement of Companies in the European Community at Last'
003 003, O03, 0O3, OO3 may refer to: *003, fictional British 00 Agent *003, former emergency telephone number for the Norwegian ambulance service (until 1986) *1990 OO3, the asteroid 6131 Towen * OO3 gauge model railway *''O03 (O2)'' and other related ...
ELR 528 *WF Ebke, Centros'' – Some Realities and Some Mysteries' (2000) 48 American Journal of Comparative Law 623


External links


Inspire Art Ltd
United Kingdom company case law Court of Justice of the European Union case law Dutch case law 2003 in the Netherlands 2003 in United Kingdom case law European Union company case law