Judgment of 2019 confirmed – defeat for Raiffeisen Switzerland before the Federal gerichtdie Swiss Bank failed with its plan to allow an exchange of shares agreement from the Era Vincenz void.1 Kommentar1Das Logo of the Raiffeisenbank on the Limmatquai in Zurich.Photo: Gaetan Bally/Keystone
The Raiffeisen Switzerland has failed before the Federal court of your intention to make a share exchange agreement from the Era Pierin Vincenz void. The Lausanne judge to confirm a judgment of the St. Gallen commercial court, in July 2019.
in Concrete terms, the Raiffeisen court wanted to see, that the contract of exchange is in March 2012, between her and the Aneco AG closed joint-Stock invalid because the Bank had not been about subtle ownership its security.
According to Raiffeisen, was the conclusion of the contract, a so-called wants to defect. It had not been known, that a fiduciary relationship existed is a hidden participation of Beat Stocker and then-CEO Pierin Vincenz. This is evident from a published Wednesday by the judgment of the Federal court.
the Stocker was at the time the mandate for Raiffeisen active. After the barter contract is further based on the contracts were closed, to make the Raiffeisen also undo.
The former Raiffeisen CEO Pierin Vincenz. Photo: Gian Ehrenzeller/Keystone
The share exchange, the following masses of delivery: Raiffeisen 2012 was the sole owner of KMU Capital AG. She handed Peter Wüst, as well as the Aneco and the owner of Andreas Etter 40 percent of that share and received by the Aneco 60 percent of the shares of Investnet AG. 2015, Raiffeisen-selling the two 60-per cent share of the newly formed Investnet Holding AG. To this were Etter, desolate, and Vincenz involved.
With the judicial determination that the share exchange agreement with the Aneco is invalid, wanted to Raiffeisen create a binding basis. The question as to the validity of this exchange agreement should no longer need to be placed at the desired processes against the resultant contracts.
the commercial court of The Canton of St. Gallen is not joined to the lawsuit because it saw the legal conditions are not met. The Federal court confirmed this view. A declaratory action was permitted only under certain conditions.
The Federal court of justice has held that the Raiffeisen need to complain to the issuance of the shares. These are no longer in Aneco, to a claim for enrichment against the defendant.
According to Federal court is to accept that different courts need to be dealing with the controversial contracts, and it can come on the basic question of the validity of the share exchange agreement to a different Judge.
comments please Log in to comment