Rivista del Diritto Commerciale e del diritto generale delle Obbligazioni

Summary: 1. Premessa. – 2. La norma emergenziale. – 3. Il diritto ante emergenza COVID19. – 3.1 Il “luogo” di convocazione dell’assemblea. – 3.2. Il verbale. – 4. Il diritto ante e post emergenza COVID19. – 4.1. Due equivoci da fugare. – 5. Ulteriori profili di “dematerializzazione” del procedimento assembleare secondo il diritto positivo vigente. – 6. Conclusioni. --- Abstract: In order to allow the meetings of a company, given the emergency situation caused by the COVID19 virus, Article 106, n. 2, Decree Law 18, 17th March 2020 (“Cura Italia”) determined that the meetings can take place “telematically” and also in “purely” telematic way (virtual only). It has been said that it is a “closed doors” meeting, but the emergency provision allows the meeting to take place also exclusively in remote virtual mode, regardless of a statutory clause that allows it, as it would be according to general company law. The exceptional nature of art. 106 sub. 2 of the DL resides in the fact that it allows for such operating modes to be enforced by directors, not chosen by shareholders: casually, when the entire company capital is virtually represented in the meeting; or programmatically, introducing an appropriate statutory clause. In short, the emergency rule cannot impose new or exceptional instruments that would not have been possible in the previous law, the only big difference being that the imposition can come from a simple notification of the meeting decided by the boards [executives in USA; directors in Britain] rather than from the shareholders on the basis of statutory clauses. Keywords: Shareholder’s Meeting – Virtual Only Meeting – Virtual Shareholder Meetings – Notification of the meeting – Statutory clause.