Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T08:50:34.112Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recent Golden Share Cases in the Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Tamás Szabados

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In several golden share cases, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “Court”) condemned Member States for reserving certain special rights in privatized companies for themselves. In spite of the Court's consistently strict approach in the golden share cases, the more recent golden share judgments demonstrate that the Court's practice is not free from uncertainties. In its case law, the Court seems to hesitate between the application of the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital. Additionally, it is not entirely clear which measures are caught by provisions on the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital.

Type
Articles
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 16 , Issue 5 , October 2015 , pp. 1099 - 1130
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 Commission Staff Working Document: Special Rights in Privatized Companies in the Enlarged Union—A Decade Full of Developments, at 5 (July 22, 2005) [hereinafter Brussels], http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/capital/docs/privcompanies_en.pdf; Rickford, Jonathan, Company Law and Economic Protectionism 54, 56 (Bernitz, Ulf & Wolf-Georg Ringe eds., 2010). See, e.g., Case C-58/99, Comm'n v. Italy, 2000 E.C.R. I-3811; Case C-367/98, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2002 E.C.R. I-4731; Case C-207/07, Comm'n v. Spain, 2008 E.C.R. I-111.Google Scholar

2 Communication of the Commission on Certain Legal Aspects Concerning Intra-EU Investment, 1997 O.J. (C 220) 15 [hereinafter 1997 O.J. (C 220) 15].Google Scholar

3 Portugal, Case C-367/98 at para. 41; Italy, Case C-58/99 at para. 20; Case C-483/99, Comm'n v. France, 2002 E.C.R. I-4781; Case C-503/99, Comm'n v. Belgium, 2002 E.C.R. I-4809; Case C-463/00, Comm'n v. Spain, 2003 E.C.R. I-4581; Case C-98/01, Comm'n v. U.K., 2003 E.C.R. I-4641; Case C-463/04 and C-464/04, Federconsumatori and Associazione Azionariato Diffuso dell'AEM SpA v. Comune di Milano, 2007 E.C.R. I-10419; Case C-112/05, Comm'n v. Germany, 2007 E.C.R. I-8995; Case C-326/07, Comm'n v. Italy, 2009 E.C.R. I-2291; Case C-274/06, Comm'n v. Spain, 2008 E.C.R. I-26; Spain, Case C-207/07 at para. 1.Google Scholar

4 Opinion of the Advocate General Colomer at para. 1, Italy, Case C-326/07, Comm'n v. Italy (Nov. 6, 2008), http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=67893&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=Ist&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=193589 [hereinafter Opinion of the Advocate General Colomer].Google Scholar

5 Id. Google Scholar

6 Id. at para. 2.Google Scholar

7 See generally Stanisław Sołtińsky, Golden Shares: Recent Developments in E.C.J. Jurisprudence and Member States Legislation, in 2 Festschrift für Klaus J. Hopt zum 70: Geburtstag 2571 (Stefan Grundmann et al. eds., 2010); Larry Catá Backer, The Private Law of Public Law: Public Authorities as Shareholders, Golden Shares, Sovereign Wealth Funds, and the Public Law Element in Private Choice of Law, 82 Tulane L. Rev. 1801 (2008); Weiss, Michael, Goldene Aktien im Lichte der Rechtsprechung des EuGH 174 (2007); Christine O'Grady Putek, Limited but Not Lost: A Comment on the ECJ's Golden Share Decisions, 72 Fordham L. Rev. 2219 (2004); Adolff, Johannes, Turn of the Tide?: The “Golden Share” Judgements of the European Court of Justice and the Liberalization of the European Capital Markets, 3 German L.J. (2002); Grundmann, Stefan & Möslein, Florian, Die Goldene Aktie, 32 Zeitschrift für Unternehmens und Gesellschaftsrecht (ZGR) 317 (2003), http://edoc.huberlin.de/oa/articles/reo24K3XTSYw/PDF/25eHWpmQPSSxk.pdf; Grundmann, Stefan & Möslein, Florian, Golden Shares—State Control in Privatised Companies: Comparative Law, European Law and Policy Aspects (July 23, 2003), http://ssrn.com/abstract=410580 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.410580; Kuznetsov, Ivan, The Legality of Golden Shares Under EC Law, 1 Hanse L. Rev. 22 (2005); Gaydarska, Nadia & Rammeloo, Stephan, The Legality of the ‘Golden Share’ Under EC Law, 5 Maastricht Faculty L. Working Paper 1 (2009), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1426077; Gyulai-Schmidt, Andrea, Aranyrészvények Európában, 13 Európai Tükör 44 (2008); Scarchillo, Gianluca, Privatizations, Control Devices and Golden Share. The Harmonizing Intervention of the European Court of Justice, 3 Comp. L. Rev. 1 (2012).Google Scholar

8 Paal, Boris P., EuGH: Golden Shares bei Portugal Telecom, 21 Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht (EuZW) 701 (2010); Adamczyk, Lukasz & Baranski, Tymoteusz, The Compatibility of the Polish State's Golden Shares With EC Law, 11 EBOR 95 (2010).Google Scholar

9 Gallo, Daniele, The CJEU vis-à-vis EU and Non-EU Investors, Between National and European Solidarity: Golden Shares, Sovereign Investment and Socio-Economic Protectionism Under Free Movement Rules, at 1, 7, (LUISS Guido Carli/Dep't of Law, Working Paper No. 03-2014), http://eprints.luiss.it/1297/1/WPG_03-14_Gallo.pdf.Google Scholar

10 Case C-95/12, Comm'n v. Germany (Oct. 22, 2013), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

11 See generally Case C-326/07, Comm'n v. Italy, 2009 E.C.R. I-2291; Case C-171/08, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2010 E.C.R. I-6817; Case C-543/08, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2010 E.C.R. I-11241; Case C-212/09, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2011 E.C.R. I-10889; Case C-244/11, Comm'n v. Greece (Nov. 8. 2012), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

12 1997 O.J. (C 220) 15, supra note 2, at para. 4; Brussels, supra note 1, annex 1, at 27.Google Scholar

13 Case C-58/99, Comm'n v. Italy, 2000 E.C.R. I-3811, para. 20.Google Scholar

14 Case C-367/98, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2002 E.C.R. I-4731, para. 56; see also Case C-483/99, Comm'n v. France, 2002 E.C.R. I-4781, paras. 55–56; Case C-503/99, Comm'n v. Belgium, 2002 E.C.R. I-4809, paras. 58–59; Case C-463/00, Comm'n v. Spain, 2003 E.C.R. I-4581, paras. 85–86; Case C-98/01, Comm'n v. U.K., 2003 E.C.R. I-4641, paras. 51–52.Google Scholar

15 Case C-112/05, Comm'n v. Germany, 2007 E.C.R. I-8995, paras. 8, 13–16. Consolidated Version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 2012 O.J. (C 326) 47.Google Scholar

16 Case C-326/07, Comm'n v. Italy, 2009 E.C.R. I-2291, para. 3.Google Scholar

17 Id. at para. 4.Google Scholar

18 Id. at para. 5.Google Scholar

19 Id. at para. 11.Google Scholar

20 Id. at para. 12.Google Scholar

21 Opinion of Advocate General Colomer, supra note 4, at para. 44.Google Scholar

22 Case C-326/07, Comm'n v. Italy, 2009 E.C.R. I-2291, para. 45.Google Scholar

23 Id. at paras. 32–39.Google Scholar

24 See Pießkalla, Michael, Unzulässige Sonderrechte des Staates bei Ungenauigkeit der Kriterien, 20 EuZW 463 (2009); Rickford, supra note 1, at 88–90.Google Scholar

25 Italy, Case C326/07 at paras. 34–35.Google Scholar

26 Id. at para. 35.Google Scholar

27 Id. Council Directive 88/361, annex I, I.2 (explanatory notes), 1988 O.J. (L 178) 5 (EC).Google Scholar

28 Case C-112/05, Comm'n v. Germany, 2007 E.C.R. I-8995, paras. 13, 18.Google Scholar

29 Case C-326/07, Comm'n v. Italy, 2009 E.C.R. I-2291, para. 36.Google Scholar

30 Torrent, Ramon, Pourquoi un Revirement de la Jurisprudence “Golden Share” de la Cour de Justice de l'Union Européenne Est-Il Indispensable?, in A Man for all Treaties—Liber Amicorum en l'honneur de Jean-Claude Piris 539, 555 (M. Arpio Santacruz et al. eds., 2012); Mestre, Bruno, The ECJ's Decision on Portugal's “Golden Share”: Broader Implications of a Restatement, 9 Eur. L. Rep. 283, 286 (2010).Google Scholar

31 Germelmann, Claas Friedrich, Konkurrenz der Grundfreiheiten und Missbrauch von Gemeinschaftsrecht—Zum Verhältnis von Kapitalverkehrs—und Niederlassungsfreiheit in der neueren Rechtsprechung, 19 EuZW 596, 597 (2008); Pießkalla, supra note 24, at 464.Google Scholar

32 Italy, Case C-326/07 at para. 36.Google Scholar

33 Id. at para. 35.Google Scholar

34 O'Brien, Martha, Case C-326/07, Commission of the European Communities v. Italian Republic, Judgment of the Court of Justice (Third Chamber) of 26 March 2009, 47 Common Mkt. L. Rev. 245, 255-56 (2010); Hindelang, Steffen, The Free Movement of Capital and Foreign Direct Investment 85 (2009).Google Scholar

35 Case C-326/07, Comm'n v. Italy, 2009 E.C.R. I-2291, para. 38.Google Scholar

36 Hindelang, supra note 34, at 96–108.Google Scholar

37 Marcus Lutter, Walter Bayer & Jessica Schmidt, Europäisches Unternehmens—und Kapitalmarktrecht 178 (2012).Google Scholar

38 Justin Kotthaus, Binnenmarktrecht und externe Kapitalverkehrsfreiheit 54 (2012).Google Scholar

39 Bekkum, Jaron Van, Golden Shares: A New Approach, at 1 (Nov. 15, 2009), http://ssrn.com/abstract=1684030.Google Scholar

40 See Paal, supra note 8, at 701; Stöber, Michael, Goldene Aktien und Kapitalverkehrsfreiheit in Europa, 13 Neue Zeitschrift für Gesellschaftsrecht (NZG) 977 (2010); Purnhagen, Kai, Beschrankung des freien Kapitalverkehrs durch Halten von golden shares an Portugal Telecom—Anmerkung, 21 EuZW 706 (2010); Müller-Michaels, Olaf, Keine Wende bei Golden Shares und Kapitalverkehrsfreiheit, 65 Betriebs-Berater 2395 (2010); Mestre, supra note 30, at 283; Sonder, Nicolas, AG, Vorzugsaktien, Goldene Aktien, freier Kapitalverkehr, Direktinvestition, Vertragsverletzung, 26 Entscheidungen zum Wirtschaftsrecht 739 (2010).Google Scholar

41 Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi at para. 51 (Dec. 2, 2009), Case C-171/08, Comm'n v. Portugal (Dec. 2, 2009), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

42 Portugal, Case C-171/08 at para. 77.Google Scholar

43 Id. at para. 80.Google Scholar

44 Klees, Andreas, Goldene Aktien, Sonderrechte, freier Kapitalverkehr, Energieversorgung, Verhaltnismäßigkeit/“Kommission/Portugal”, 27 Entscheidungen zum Wirtschaftsrecht 79 (2011).Google Scholar

45 Case C-543/08, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2010 E.C.R. I-11241, para. 37.Google Scholar

46 Id. at para. 99.Google Scholar

47 Jérémie Houet, Golden Shares: No Shining Anymore?, 18 Colum. J. Eur. L. Section III. (2011), available at http://www.cjel.net/online/18_1-houet/.Google Scholar

48 Behme, Caspar, Golden Shares, Strategische AG, Niederlassungsfreiheit, Kapitalverkehrsfreiheit/“Kommission/Griechenland,” 29 Entscheidungen zum Wirtschaftsrecht 161 (2013).Google Scholar

49 See Papadopoulos, Thomas, Greek Legislation on Strategic Investments; The Next “Golden Share” Case Before the European Court of Justice?, 6 Eur. Comapny L. 264, 266-67 (2009).Google Scholar

50 Case C-244/11, Comm'n v. Greece, para. 23 (Nov. 8. 2012), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

51 Id. at para. 30.Google Scholar

52 Id. at para. 27.Google Scholar

53 Peter-Christian Müller-Graff, Einflußiregelungen in Gesellschaften Zwischen Binnenmarktrecht und Eigentumsordnung, in Festschrift für Peter Ulmer 929, 933-34 (Mathias Habersack et al. eds., 2003); Kotthaus, supra note 38, at 44–45; Hindelang, supra note 34, at 88–89, 108–14.Google Scholar

54 Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union, art. 65(2), Mar. 25, 1957, 2008 O.J. (L 115) 72, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:12008E065 [hereinafter TFEU].Google Scholar

55 Torrent, supra note 30, at 556–57.Google Scholar

56 Id. at 556.Google Scholar

57 TFEU art. 49(2).Google Scholar

58 Andreas Haratsch, Christian Koenig & Matthias Pechstein, Europarecht 496-98 (2012).Google Scholar

59 TFEU art. 63,Google Scholar

60 Opinion of Advocate General Colomer, supra note 4, at para. 46.Google Scholar

61 See Pießkalla, supra note 24, at 464; Schweitzer, Heike, Sovereign Wealth Funds—Market Investors or “Imperialists Capitalists”: The European Response to Direct Investments by Non-EU State-Controlled Entities, in Company Law and Economic Protectionism 270-78 (Bernitz, Ulf & Wolf-Georg Ringe eds., 2010); Tountopoulos, Vassilios, Niederlassungsfreiheit: Genehmigungserfordernis für Beteiligung an “strategischen Aktiengesellschaften”—Nachträgliche Kontrolle der Beschlussfassung, Anmerkung, 24 EuZW 33 (2013); O'Brien, supra note 34, at 256-57; Ruccia, Nicola, The New and Shy Approach of the Court of Justice Concerning Golden Shares, 24 Eur. Bus. L. Rev. 275, 291 (2013); Gallo, supra note 9, at 14.Google Scholar

62 Torrent, supra note 30, at 560.Google Scholar

63 Gallo, supra note 9, at 16; Bekkum, Van, supra note 39, at 8.Google Scholar

64 Pedro Caro De Sousa, Case Comment: Case C-244/11 Commission v. Greece, in eutopia Law, point A, available at http://eutopialaw.com/2012/11/20/case-comment-case-c-24411-commission-v-greece/.Google Scholar

65 1997 O.J. (C 220) 15, supra note 2, at paras. 7–8.Google Scholar

66 Case C-212/09, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2011 E.C.R. I-10889, paras. 66–68; S⊘rensen, Karsten Engsig, Company Law as a Restriction to Free Movement—Examination of the Notion of “Restriction” Using Company Law as the Frame of Reference 8 (Nordic & Eur. Co. L., Working Paper No. 14–01, 2014), http://ssrn.com/abstract=2386145 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2386145.Google Scholar

67 Case C-244/11, Comm'n v. Greece, paras. 28–29 (Nov. 8. 2012), http://curia.europa.eu/; S⊘rensen, supra note 66, at 8.Google Scholar

68 Classen, Claus Dieter, VW-Gesetz hat Bestand, 128 Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt 1607 (2013); Hilgers, Hans Anton, Das emeute Vertragsverletzungsverfahren um das VW-Gesetz—Ein Kostspieliger Streit um des Kaisers Bart?, 32 Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht (ZIP) 1535 (2012).Google Scholar

69 Case C-112/05, Comm'n v. Germany, 2007 E.C.R. I-8995; see generally Kilian, Wolfgang, Vereinbarkeit des VW-Gesetzes mit Europarecht, 48 Neue Juristische Wochenschrift (NJW) 3469 (2007); Ringe, Wolf-Georg, Case C-112/05, Commission v. Germany (“VW Law”), Judgment of the Grand Chamber of 23 October 2007, NYR., 45 Common Mkt. L. Rev. 537 (2008); Sander, Florian, Höchststimmrechte und Kapitalverkehrsfreiheit nach der VW-Gesetz-Entscheidung—Psychologisiert der EuGH den Schutzbereich des Art. 56 EG, 19 EuZW 33 (2008); Cordt, Yves de & Colard, Patricia, CJCE, 23 Octobre 2007, Commission/Allemagne Aff. C-112/05, Rec. p. I-8995, 16 Revue des Affaires Européennes 473 (2007); Zumbansen, Peer & Saam, Daniel, The ECJ, Volkswagen and European Corporate Law: Reshaping the European Varieties of Capitalism, 8 German L.J. 1027 (2007); Schmauch, Magnus, Economic Patriotism Made in Germany—The Court of Justice Overturns Parts of the “VW-Gesetz”, 6 Eur. L. Rep. 438 (2007); Sanders, Florian, Case 112/05, European Commission v. Federal Republic of Germany: The Volkswagen Case and Art. 56 EC—A Proper Result, Yet Also a Missed Opportunity?, 14 Colum. J. Eur. L. 359 (2008); Verse, Dirk A., Das VW-Urteil und Seine Folgen. Zugleich Besprechung von EuGH, Urteil vom 23.10.2007, Rs. C-112/05 - Kommission./.Deutschland, 5 Zeitschrift für Gemeinschaftsprivatrecht 31 (2008); Weiss, Michael, Staatlicher Schutz vor Investitionen nach dem Urteil zum VW-Gesetz, 20 Europäisches Wirtschafts- & Steuerrecht (EWS) 13 (2008); Teichmann, Christoph & Heise, Elisabeth, Das VW-Urteil des EuGH und seine Folgen, 62 Betriebs-Berater 2577 (2007), http://www.jura.uni-wuerzburg.de/fileadmin/02130100/WS2009_10/Krakauer_Forum/Teichmann_Heise_BB_2007_2577.pdf; Cherevach, Victoria & Megens, Bas, Commission of the European Communities v. Federal Republic of Germany. Case C-112/05. The VW Law Case; Some Critical Comments, 16 Maastricht J. Eur. & Comp. L. 370 (2009).Google Scholar

70 Germany, Case C-112/05 at paras. 38–56.Google Scholar

71 Id. at paras. 48–49.Google Scholar

72 Id. at para. 82.Google Scholar

73 Aktiengesellschaft, Volkswagen, Satzung § 11(1) (2015), http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/content/de/investor_relations/corporate_governance/satzung.bin.html/downloadfilelist/downloadfile/downloadfile/file/Satzung_Mai_2015_de.pdf.Google Scholar

74 Id. at § 25(2).Google Scholar

75 Hopt, Klaus J., European Company and Financial Law: Observations on European Politics, Protectionism, and the Financial Crisis, in Company Law and Economic Protectionism 13, 17 (Bernitz, Ulf & Wolf-Georg Ringe eds., 2010).Google Scholar

76 Case C-95/12, Comm'n v. Germany, para. 27 (Oct. 22, 2013), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

77 Id. at para. 19.Google Scholar

78 Id. at paras. 24–25.Google Scholar

79 Kalss, Susanne, Gesellschaftsrecht: Sperrminorität im VW-Gesetz - Anmerkung, 23 EuZW 949, 949 (2013).Google Scholar

80 Id. at 949.Google Scholar

81 Opinion of Advocate General Wahl at para. 54, Case C-95/12, Germany (May 29, 2013), http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=137785&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=Ist&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=19216.Google Scholar

82 Case C-95/12, Comm'n v. Germany, para. 47 (Oct. 22, 2013), http://curia.europa.eu/, cited by Philipp Kubicki, EuGH, Rs. C-95/12 (Kommission/Deutschland)—Sperrminorität im VW-Gesetz mit Unionsrecht vereinbar? at 1, 2, https://www.bundestag.de/blob/194848/e7b51aff33227ab7303f74140f928fec/sperrminorit_t_im_vw-gesetz_mit_unionsrecht_vereinbar-data.pdf.Google Scholar

83 Kubicki, supra note 82, at 2; Thomas M. J. Möllers, Die Juristische Aufarbeitung der Übernahmeschlacht VW-Porsche-ein Überblick, 17 NZG 363 (2014).Google Scholar

84 Rapp-Jung, Barbara & Bartosch, Andreas, Das neue VW-Gesetz im Spiegel der Kapitalverkehrsfreiheit—Droht wirklich ein Neues Vertragsverletzungsverfahren?, 64 Betriebs-Berater 2210, 2211-12 (2009).Google Scholar

85 Second Council Directive 77/91, 1976 O.J. (L 26) 1, art. 40 (EC)Google Scholar

Second Council Directive of 13 December 1976, on coordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 58 of the Treaty, in respect of the formation of public limited liability companies and the maintenance and alteration of their capital, with a view to making such safeguards equivalent[;]

Directive 2012/30, 2012 O.J. (L 315) 74, art. 44 (EU)Google Scholar

Directive 2012/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012, on coordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 54 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in respect of the formation of public limited liability companies and the maintenance and alteration of their capital, with a view to making such safeguards equivalent[.]

86 Rapp-Jung & Bartosch, supra note 84, at 2214–15.Google Scholar

87 Sanders, supra note 69, at 363–64.Google Scholar

88 Case C-95/12, Comm'n v. Germany, para. 38 (Oct. 22, 2013), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

89 Opinion of Advocate General Wahl, supra note 81, at para. 46.Google Scholar

90 Directive 2004/25/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of Apr. 21, 2004, On Takeover Bids, 2004 O.J. (L 142) 12, arts. 10(1)(f) & 11(3)-(4) [hereinafter Takeover Directive].Google Scholar

91 Mestre, supra note 30, at 287; Beaufort, Viviane de, One Share—One Vote, le Nouveau Saint Graal? Essec Working Papers 1, 2 (2006), http://www.essec.edu/faculty/showDeclFileRes.do?declId=6743&key=Publication-Content.Google Scholar

92 Kalss, supra note 79, at 948; Kubicki, supra note 82, at 1; Möllers, supra note 83, at 363.Google Scholar

93 Kubicki, supra note 82, at 2; Möllers, supra note 83, at 363.Google Scholar

94 Case C-171/08, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2010 E.C.R. I-6817, para. 64.Google Scholar

95 Case C-244/11, Comm'n v. Greece, paras. 15–18 (Nov. 8. 2012), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

96 Joined Cases C-105/12, Staat der Nederlanden v. Essent NV, C-106/12, Eneco Holding NV, C-107/12, Delta NV (Oct. 22, 2013), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

97 Id. at para. 2.Google Scholar

98 Id. at para. 24.Google Scholar

99 Case C-271/09, Comm'n v. Poland, 2011 E.C.R. I-13613, para. 55.Google Scholar

100 Kaupa, Clemens, A More Prudent Approach in the “Golden Share” Cases, Eur. L. Blog (Oct. 31, 2013), http://europeanlawblog.eu/?p=2015.Google Scholar

101 Joined Cases C-105/12, Staat der Nederlanden v. Essent NV, C-106/12, Eneco Holding NV, C-107/12, Delta NV, ¶ 54 (Oct. 22, 2013), http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=en&jur=C,T,F&num=C-105/12&td=ALL.Google Scholar

102 Cleynenbreugel, Pieter Van, No Privatisation in the Service of Fair Competition? Article 345 TFEU and the EU Market-State Balance After Essent, 39 Eur. L. Rev. 271 (2014).Google Scholar

103 Essent, Case C-105/12, at para. 55.Google Scholar

104 1997 O.J. (C 220) 15, supra note 2, at n.1.Google Scholar

105 Stöber, supra note 40, at 979.Google Scholar

106 Case C-543/08, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2010 E.C.R. I-11241, paras. 48–53.Google Scholar

107 Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi, supra note 41, at para. 61.Google Scholar

108 See also Case C-98/01, Comm'n v. U.K., 2003 E.C.R. I-4641, para. 48; Case C-112/05, Comm'n v. Germany, 2007 E.C.R. I-8995, paras. 26–29.Google Scholar

109 Opinion of Advocate General Maduro at paras. 22–25, Joined cases C-282/04 and C-283/04, Comm'n v. Netherlands, 2006 E.C.R. I-9141.Google Scholar

110 Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi, supra note 41, at para. 65.Google Scholar

111 Rickford, supra note 1, at 77.Google Scholar

112 Gerner-Beurle, Carsten, Shareholders Between the Market and the State. The VW Law and Other Interventions in the Market Economy, 49 Common Mkt. L. Rev. 97, 130-31 (2012).Google Scholar

113 Ringe, Wolf-Georg, Company Law and Free Movement of Capital, 69 Cambridge L.J. 378, 398-99 (2010).Google Scholar

114 Mestre, supra note 30, at 287; Lieder, Jan, Staatliche Sonderrechte in Aktiengesellschaften, 172 Zeitschrift für das gesamte Handelsrecht und Wirtschaftsrecht 306, 313-14 (2008).Google Scholar

115 Case C-543/08, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2010 E.C.R. I-11241, para. 62; S⊘rensen, supra note 66, at 13–14.Google Scholar

116 See Szabados, Tamas, The Transfer of the Company Seat within the European Union 189–206 (2012).Google Scholar

117 Case C-281/98, Roman Angonese v. Cassa di Risparmio di Bolzano SpA, 2000 E.C.R. I-4139, paras. 30–36.Google Scholar

118 Id. at para. 34.Google Scholar

119 Case C-438/05, Int'l Transport Workers’ Fed'n v. Viking Line ABP, 2007 E.C.R. I-10779, paras. 56–66.Google Scholar

120 Mads Andenas & Frank Wooldrige, European Comparative Company Law 20 (2009).Google Scholar

121 Haratsch, Koenig & Pechstein, supra note 58, at 523; Matthias Habersack & Verse, Dirk A., Europäisches Gesellschaftsrecht 41 (2011); Oppermann, Thomas, Claus Dieter Classen & Martin Nettesheim, Europarecht 510 (2011).Google Scholar

122 Kotthaus, supra note 38, at 75; Seeling, Rolf Otto & Zwickel, Martin, Das Entsenderecht in den Aufsichtsrat Einer Aktiengesellschaft als “Ewigkeitsrecht,” 63 Betriebs-Berater 622, 623 (2008); Arndt, Hans-Wolfgang & Fischer, Kristian, Europarecht 132 (2008); Verse, supra note 69, at 35.Google Scholar

123 Habersack & Verse, supra note 121, at 15; Ohler, Christoph, Europäische Kapital—und Zahlungsverkehrsfreiheit 148-49 (2002).Google Scholar

124 Gerner-Beurle, supra at note 112, at 134.Google Scholar

125 Barnard, Catherine, The Substantive Law of the EU—The Four Freedoms 586-87 (2013).Google Scholar

126 Mestre, supra note 30, at 286.Google Scholar

127 Kotthaus, supra note 38, at 75–76; Verse, supra note 69, at 35; Haratsch, Koenig & Pechstein, supra note 58, at 523.Google Scholar

128 Case C-98/01, Comm'n v. U.K., 2003 E.C.R. I-4641, paras. 45–47; Case C-463/00, Comm'n v. Spain, 2003 E.C.R. I-4581, paras. 58–61. See Kotthaus, supra note 38, at 91–95; Biondi, Andrea, When the State is the Owner—Some Further Comments on the Court of Justice ‘Golden Shares’ Strategy, in Company Law and Economic Protectionism 96 (Bernitz, Ulf & Wolf-Georg Ringe eds., 2010); S⊘rensen, supra note 66, at 9; Sanders, supra note 69, at 367-68; Steinke, Kirsa, Die Übertragbarkeit der Keck-Rechtsprechung des EuGH auf die Niederlassungsfreiheit 200-06 (2009).Google Scholar

129 Case C-543/08, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2010 E.C.R. I-11241, paras. 65–68; Case C-212/09, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2011 E.C.R. I-10889, paras. 62–65; Frenz, Walter, Goldene Aktien Nach der 3. Portugal Entscheidung, 23 EWS 125, 129-30 (2011); Müller-Michaels, supra note 40, at 2396.Google Scholar

130 Case C-171/08, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2010 E.C.R. I-6817, para. 72.Google Scholar

131 Portugal, Case C-171/08 at 84; Portugal, Case C-212/09 at para. 82.Google Scholar

132 Portugal, Case C-171/08 at para. 70.Google Scholar

133 Id. at para. 71.Google Scholar

134 Id. at paras. 73–74; Portugal, Case C-171/08 at paras. 85–86; Portugal, Case C-212/09 at para. 83.Google Scholar

135 Case C-543/08, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2010 E.C.R. I-11241, para. 87; Case C-212/09, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2011 E.C.R. I-10889, para. 85.Google Scholar

136 Case C-171/08, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2010 E.C.R. I-6817, para. 70.Google Scholar

137 Id. at para. 71.Google Scholar

138 Id. at para. 75; Portugal, Case C-543/08 at paras. 90–92; Portugal, Case C-212/09 at paras. 88, 90.Google Scholar

139 Portugal, Case C-171/08 at para. 76; Portugal, Case C-212/09 at para. 89.Google Scholar

140 Case C-326/07, Comm'n v. Italy, 2009 E.C.R. I-2291, paras. 71–74.Google Scholar

141 Portugal, Case C-171/08 at para. 47.Google Scholar

142 Case C-244/11, Comm'n v. Greece, para. 2 (Nov. 8. 2012), http://curia.europa.eu/.Google Scholar

143 Case C-543/08, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2010 E.C.R. I-11241, paras. 93–96; Case C-212/09, Comm'n v. Portugal, 2011 E.C.R. I-10889, paras. 91–96.Google Scholar

144 O'Brien, supra note 34, at 259.Google Scholar

145 Greece, C-244/11 at para. 26.Google Scholar

146 Id. at para. 27.Google Scholar

147 Müller-Michaels, supra note 40, at 2396.Google Scholar

148 Bekkum, Van, supra note 39, at 1.Google Scholar

149 Brussels, supra note 1, at 12.Google Scholar

150 Christian Friedrich Hebbel, Tagebücher, Erster Band, 1835–1839, 64 (1905), available at https://archive.org/stream/smtlichewerke11werngoog#page/n0/mode/2up (author's translation of “Es ist nicht Alles Gold, was glänzt. Aber, es glänzt auch nicht Alles, was Gold ist, sollte man billig hinzu setzen.”).Google Scholar