This paper aims to interpret the concept of “in-house proving companies”– pursuant to Article 12, Dir. 2014/24/UE, Article 17, Dir. 2014/23/UE, andArticle 28, Dir. 2014/25/UE – within the European and national legislative frameworkof the concept of “group of companies”. Bringing the “in-house providing”back to a group relationship between two or more companies should involve, in thefirst instance, the application of the so called “single economic entity doctrine”, asdeveloped in the competition field mainly to impute fines to the parent companyfor the competition infringements committed by the controlled companies.Furthermore, in the Italian legal system, the above mentioned theory should entailthe substantial convergence between the control exercised by the public authorityover the “in-house providing company”, the decisive influence underlying theconcept of “single economic entity” and the management and coordination activityreferred to in Article 2497 of the Italian civil Code. As a consequence, theState and the other public administrations could be considered responsible for theabuses carried out to the detriment of the minority shareholders and creditors ofthe “in-house providing company”.Finally, the proposed conclusions would make it easier to overcome the thesesthat want to exclude the application of the Articles 2497 of the Italian civil Codeto the in-house relationship due to the alleged lack of economic and/or entrepreneurialinterests of public authorities exercising management and coordinationactivities of “in-house providing” companies.
|Numero di pagine||43|
|Rivista||RIVISTA DI DIRITTO SOCIETARIO|
|Stato di pubblicazione||Published - 2020|