Publications  


Asset deal – buyer not bound by preferential lease rights
Dr. Martin Foerster, ILO-Newsletter vom 23.1.2015

By law, the buyer of a property automatically enters into existing lease agreements on behalf of the seller. However, the Supreme Court recently rendered a judgment stating that this does not necessarily apply to all clauses contained in a lease agreement, thereby redefining the scope of this provision.
Details
Publications  


Bank guarantees – abuse of rights when demanding payment?
Mag. Stephan Schmalzl und Mag. Norbert Amlacher, ILO Newsletter vom 5. Dezember 2014

The Supreme Court recently dealt with a case in which a claim secured by a bank guarantee became due after the guarantee period expired. It is crucial to have in-depth knowledge of the advantages and strategic use of abstract claims arising from bank guarantees, as well as an understanding of the pitfalls triggered by poorly drafted bank guarantees and underlying commercial agreements.
Details
Publications  


Can a successfully challenged arbitrator be held liable for frustrated costs?
Dr. Nikolaus Pitkowitz, ILO Newsletter vom 27. November 2014

A recent Supreme Court decision analysed whether parties to arbitral proceedings are still bound to pay for part of an arbitrator´s services where the arbitrator is successfully challenged because of his or her conduct. The court held that, unless the work is found to be worthless, the arbitrator is entitled to receive remuneration.
Details
Publications  


Let´s rock during sick leave
Mag. Jakob Widner, ILO Newsletter vom 12. November 2014

In a recent decision the Supreme Court had to consider whether activities performed during an employee´s sick leave that would not typically be regarded as adequate conduct were acceptable. The Supreme Court confirmed the lower courts´ decisions and opined that the plaintiff had only followed his doctor´s instructions and that he could rely on this advice.
Details
Publications  


Tenant may install video camera outside leased object without lessor´s consent
ILO Newsletter, 31. Oktober 2014

In a recent case involving a tenant who had affixed two mock cameras to the front of his property without obtaining the landlord´s prior consent, the Supreme Court analysed the tenant´s rights in this context. It ruled that, based on the direction and position of the cameras, an impartial observer would not have the impression of being monitored. Hence, the action was dismissed.
Details
Blättern: < 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |  18  | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | >