Beschlussmängel im Personengesellschaftsrecht

The dissertation examines, from a comparative law perspective, the legal consequences and particularly the binding effect of defective partnership resolutions in Swiss, German, and French law. Swiss law does not regulate the question of whether defective resolutions are null and void or just voidable in partnership law. The study therefore explores whether such defective partnership resolutions should be treated following the rules of general contract law - similar to the German declaratory model - or whether an analogy to corporate law should be drawn.
The work first addresses the foundational aspects, including the types of partnerships under comparison and their specific characteristics, the procedures and subject matter of resolutions, and the legal nature of resolutions themselves.
It then analyses the respective national regimes governing defective resolutions, taking into account the modernised German partnership law (MoPeG), as well as both the former and the revised French law.
This is followed by a comparative analysis. Building on the insights gained, the study develops a differentiated approach for Swiss law that distinguishes between different types of resolutions and different forms or categories of partnerships.
Resolutions concerning the basic structure of the partnership should, as a rule, be assessed under contract law (in conjunction with Art. 7 of the Swiss Civil Code). Here, the personal bond between the partners and the close connection of the resolution to the agreement of the partners are decisive. By contrast, resolutions concerning management measures that are taken within the agreed framework rather tend to justify the use of analogies to the corporate law.
Further, the more autonomous a partnership becomes, the more comparable its structure is to that of a corporation, and therefore this makes drawing an analogy all the more appropriate.