preview

The Acquired Rights Directive 77 / 187 / Eec

Decent Essays

With further refinement in Giuseppe d 'Urso, Adriana Ventadori and others v Ercole Marelli Elettromeccanica Generale SpA and others, [1992] C-362/89, IRLR 136 ECJ and Spano and Others v Fiat Geotech and Fiat Hitachi, [1996] C-472/93, IDS Brief 558, EJC. These two cases clarified that the sale of an insolvent business as a going concern is within the scope of the Acquired Rights Directive 77/187/EEC. It is interesting to note the House of Lords in the select Committee Report on the Amended Directive, 1996 affirmed this approach (Hardy, 1996). Although the case of d’Urso v. Ercole [1992] was considered in the context of Italian law, the judgment differentiated between special administration proceedings with the intention of liquidation and continued trading whereby the rescue attempt was under the direction of a court appointed administrator, which was definitely within the scope of the Acquired Rights Directive 77/187/EEC. This meant it could assist in formulating persuasive arguments in similar circumstances in UK submissions.

In the case of Spano v Fiat Geotech SpA and Others [1996] the CJEU again considered, Special Administration and its intention to improve the economic situation of the ailing business. The judgment stated the economic and social objectives within the procedures are designed to avoid liquidation and promote continuation of the business, concluding that the preservation of employees’ rights in such circumstances were within the auspices of the

Get Access