Some Significant Issues Related to Conduct of Due Diligence on the Example of Georgian and German Law

Authors

  • Salome Kavtaradze

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48614/jlaw.2.2020.113-128

Keywords:

Due Diligence, legal obligation, commercial custom.

Abstract

Mergers and Acquisitions are very important part of business transactions for many companies. Besides, transactions are unavoidable due to economic changes. There are plenty of methods to ensure successfulness of transactions, but among the Due Diligence Investigation has significant place. Due Diligence is an instrument, which gives possibility to buyer to analyze targeted company fully, to discover strengths and weaknesses of the company, to set real price and etc. As a result, interested company can make decision based on objective and real facts.

Due Diligence, as an instrument to analyze companies is broadly used all over the world. Although, despite of frequency of conducting different types of Due Diligence, there is always a dispute if interested party has a legal obligation to conduct Due Diligence before merging or acquiring a company, or on the other side, is Target Company obliged to let them conduct Due Diligence, as most sensitive information’s are subject of analyzing. It’s important to look at Due Diligence also as well-known commercial custom, as in some countries Due Diligence is considered to be commercial custom There are    lot of issues regarding legal or procedural conduct of Due Diligence, but in the given paper will be discussed legal on non-legal obligation of conduction Due Diligence on behalf of Georgian and German Law.

Author Biography

Salome Kavtaradze

Master of Law, LLM, Doctoral Student and Visiting Lecturer of Faculty of Law, Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University.

References

Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch von Deutschland, 08/18/1896.

Handelsgesetzbuch von Deutschland, 10/05/1897.

Law of Georgia on Entrepreneurs, Departments of the Parliament of Georgia, 21-22, 28/10/1994.

Georgian Civil Code, Parliamentary Gazette, 31, 24/07/1997.

Beisel D., Beck’sches MandatsHandbuch Due Diligence, Beisel D., Andreas F. E. (Hrsg.), 3. Aufl., München, 2017, 2.

Beisel W., Der Unternehmenskauf, Beisel W., Klumpp H. -H. (Hrsg.), 7. Aufl., München, 2016, §2 Due Diligence, Rn. 8-10.

Berens W., Schmitting W., Stauch J., Due Diligence bei Unternehmensakquisitionen, Berens W., Brauner H. U., Strauch J., Krauner T. (Hrsg.), 7. Aufl., Stuttgart, 63 ff.

Büdenbender U., BGB – Schuldrecht, Dauner-Lieb B., Langen W. (Hrsg.), 3. Aufl., BGB Anhang II, §§ 433–480: Unternehmenskauf – BGB, Baden-Baden, Berlin, 2016, Rn. 13.

Böttcher L., Verpflichtung des Vorstandes einer Aktiengesellschaft zur Durchführung einer Due Diligence beim Beteiligungserwerb, Zur Due Diligence als Verkehrssitte, 1. Aufl., Baden-Baden, 2005, 32, 140, 157, 158.

Chanturia L., Comments to the Civil Code of Georgia, Book III, Tbilisi, 2001, 166-168 (in Georgian).

Chanturia L., Comments to the Civil Code of Georgia, Book I, Chanturia L., (ed.), Tbilisi, 2017, Art 52, field 16, 307 (in Georgian).

Chachava S., Comments to the Civil Code of Georgia, Chanturia L. (ed.), §494, field 29 (in Georgian).

Davis W. B. E., The Importance of Due Diligence Investigations: Failed Mergers and Acquisitions of the United States’ Companies, ankarabarreview, 2009/1, 5.

Ehring P., Die Due Diligence im Spannungsverhältnis zwischen kaufrechtlichem Haftungssystem und vertraglicher Gestaltung, Frankfurt am Main, 2010, 19.

Fatemi A., Die Obligenheit zur Due Diligence beim Unternehmenskauf, Eine Rekapitulation der Fahrlässigkeit, Düsseldorf, 2009, 16, 45, 170-171.

Faust F., BeckOK BGB, Hau W., Poseck R. (Hrsg.), 55. Aufl., München, 2020, §453, Rn 1.

Hagen Ch., Die Due Diligence bei Unternehmenstransaktionen, Studienarbeit, München, 2013, 2.

Hörmann J., Due Diligence beim Unternehmenskauf, Transaktionen, Vermögen, Pro Bono : Festschrift zum zehnjährigen Bestehen von P+P Pöllath + Partners, Birk D. (Hrsg.), München, 2018, 139, 147.

Kavtaradze S., On Due Diligence, as the Issue of Legal Notion, Journal of Law, № 2, 2016, 121.

Kipiani V., Short Overview of the Certain Legal Risks related to Acquisition of Georgian Company by the Buyer and Ways of its Reflection in the Agreement, Tbilisi, 2009, <http://www.mkd.ge/geo/comp_shedzenis_samartlebrivi_riskebi.pdf> [12.10.2020] (in Georgian).

Klie M. A., Die Zulässigkeit einer Due Diligence im Rahmen des Erwerbs von börsennotierten Gesellschaften nach Inkrafttrete des Anlegerschutzverbesserungsgesetzes (AnSVG), Frankfurt am Main, 2008, 19.

Kereselidze D., Der Allgemeine Teil des Georgischen Zivilgesetzbuches von 1997, Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung, Frankfurt am Main, 2005, 79.

Koch R., HGB Handelsgesetzbuch Kommentar, Oetker H. (Hrsg.), 6. Aufl, München, 2019, §377, rn. 7 ff.

Knöfler K., Rechtliche Auswirkungen der Due Diligence bei Unternehmensakquisitionen, Frankfurt am Main, 2001, 72, 73, 74, 75.

Kusche M. S., Die aktienrechtliche Zulässigkeit der Durchführung einer Due Diligence anlässlich eines Unternehmenskaufs, Mit Due Diligence-Checkliste für die Zielgesellschaft, Studien zum deutschen und europäischen Gesellschafts- und Wirtschaftsrecht, Band 2, Frankfurt am Main, 2005, 69, 70.

Kropholler J., German Civil Code, Study Comment, Darjania T., Chechelashvili Z. (Transl.), Chachanidze E., Darjania T., Totladze L. (eds.), Tbilisi, 2014, §442, field 1, 337 (in Georgian).

Kresin T., Rechtliche Grenzen der Informationsweitergabe im Rahmen der Due diligence einer Aktiengesellschaft, Duisburg-Köln, 2008, 18.

Lorenz S., Shuldrechtsreform 2002: problemschwerpunkte dre Jahre danach, München, NJW, Heft 27, 2005, 1889.

Maisuradze D., The Implementation of Additional Rights of Shareholders (Poison Pills) as Defensive Measures withn the Scopes of the Best Interests of the Corporation (Critical Analysis), Journal of Law, № 1, 2017, 60 (in Georgian).

Maisuradze D., The Implementation of Defensive Measures during the Reorganization of Capital Entity (Comparative-Legal Study Predominantly on the Example of Delaware and Georgian Corporate Law), Disserttion, TSU, Tbilisi, 2014, 26-30 (in Georgian).

Makharoblishvili G., Carrying out Fundamental Changes in the Structure of Capital Companies based on the Corporate-legal actions (Mergers and Acquisitions) Comparative-legal Analysis), Dissertation, Tbilisi, 2014, 130, 145 and others (in Georgian).

Möller J., Offenlegungen und Aufklärungspflichten beim Unternehmenskauf, NZG, Heft 22, 2012, 843.

Oetker H., HGB Handelsgesetzbuch Kommentar, Oetker H. (Hrsg.), 4. Aufl., München, 2015, 3-7.

Ogonyants K., Der Unternehmenskauf und kartellrechtliche Probleme, Norderstedt, 2012, 17.

Picot G, Handbuch Mergers & Acquisitions, Stuttgart, 2000, 223.

Perry J. S., Herd T., Mergers and acquisitions: Reducing M&A risk through improved due diligence, Strategy and Leadership, Vol. 32, № 2 2004, 12, <https://imaa-institute.org/docs/m&a/atkearney_02_Mergers_and_acquisitions-Reducing_M&A_risk_through_improved_due_diligence.pdf> [12.10.2020].

Pfeifer E. Ch., Rücktritt wegen Schlechtleistung beim Unternehmenskauf, Frankfurt am Main, 2014, 56 ff.

Robakidze S., Contracts Concluded with the Abuse of Insider Information and private legal Consequences, Compilation: Corporate Law I, Burduli I. (ed.), Tbilisi, 2011, 168 (in Georgian).

Schlitt M., Münchener Kommentar zum Aktiengesetz, Goette W., Habersack M., Kalss S. (Hrsg.), 4. Aufl., München, 2017, WpÜG §33, rn. 10-11.

Töpperwien M., Henkel S., Der Effiziente M&A Prozess, Klamar N., Sommer U., Weber I. (Hrsg.), Freiburg – München, 2013, 47, 48.

Volks M. –A., Haftungsrisiken beim Unternehmenskauf, Nordenstedt, 2009, 1.

Ruling of the Chamber of Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of Georgia № AS-1307-1245-2014 from 6 May 2015.

Ruling of the Chamber of Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of Georgia №AS-1158-1104-2014 from 25 December 2014.

Published

2020-12-31

How to Cite

Kavtaradze, S. (2020). Some Significant Issues Related to Conduct of Due Diligence on the Example of Georgian and German Law . Journal of Law, (2), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.48614/jlaw.2.2020.113-128

Issue

Section

Articles