In recent years, court decisions prohibiting the inadmissible reimbursement of deposits have increasingly become the focus of public interest. And rightly so.
The question whether there are unauthorised beneficiaries between a company and its shareholders concerns not only the company relationship but also external businesses.
In particular, legal and tax advisors, as well as banks which, for example, finance takeover transactions, must observe this prohibition. However, the question of an inadmissible refund of deposits must also be examined in the structuring of day-to-day legal relationships between the company and its shareholders, for example when concluding a tenancy agreement.
The consequences of a breach can be serious and lead to repayment obligations on the part of the beneficiary shareholder or third party, the nullity of financing or the worthlessness of collateral provided.
The legal situation regarding the prohibition of the inadmissible return of deposits is essentially not shaped by the wording of the law, but by the – partly casuistic – decisions of the Supreme Court.
The brochure by attorney Dr. Stefan Kofler is intended to provide an overview of processes which may constitute an inadmissible refund of deposits and thus make it possible to identify risky constellations at an early stage.