Protection of Creditors in Public Limited Companies: Second Council Directive and Albanian Company Law Compared: Is There a Need for Reform?

Elis Tarelli
{"title":"Protection of Creditors in Public Limited Companies: Second Council Directive and Albanian Company Law Compared: Is There a Need for Reform?","authors":"Elis Tarelli","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1130311","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The public company was the invention that allowed entrepreneurs to raise substantial amounts of capital to finance big projects. These huge amounts of money could not be mobilized without granting to entrepreneurs the privilege of limited liability. Limited liability would give them the courage to invest the money put forward by investors in projects, which sometimes entailed too high a risk of failure. The privilege of limited liability meant that the danger of failure was shifted from the entrepreneurs to the investors. Because of this shift in bearing the costs of failure, the entrepreneurs would have the incentive to abuse with the privilege of limited liability, jeopardizing the interests of the investors, be they shareholders or creditors.Should law protect the creditors of the company, or should creditors look out for themselves? If yes, how much protection should law provide? Is there any benefit from protecting this group of investors? In the European level, does the Second Company Law Directive for the protection of creditors provide the mechanisms? Is Albanian Company Law providing the basic creditors' protection mechanisms required by the Second Directive? We try to answer these questions and end our paper with few recommendations on how to better align Albanian Company Law with the Second Directive as far as the protection of creditors' interests is concerned.","PeriodicalId":140847,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Corporate Law (Other) (Sub-Topic)","volume":"31 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERPN: Corporate Law (Other) (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1130311","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The public company was the invention that allowed entrepreneurs to raise substantial amounts of capital to finance big projects. These huge amounts of money could not be mobilized without granting to entrepreneurs the privilege of limited liability. Limited liability would give them the courage to invest the money put forward by investors in projects, which sometimes entailed too high a risk of failure. The privilege of limited liability meant that the danger of failure was shifted from the entrepreneurs to the investors. Because of this shift in bearing the costs of failure, the entrepreneurs would have the incentive to abuse with the privilege of limited liability, jeopardizing the interests of the investors, be they shareholders or creditors.Should law protect the creditors of the company, or should creditors look out for themselves? If yes, how much protection should law provide? Is there any benefit from protecting this group of investors? In the European level, does the Second Company Law Directive for the protection of creditors provide the mechanisms? Is Albanian Company Law providing the basic creditors' protection mechanisms required by the Second Directive? We try to answer these questions and end our paper with few recommendations on how to better align Albanian Company Law with the Second Directive as far as the protection of creditors' interests is concerned.
公共有限公司债权人保护:第二次理事会指令与阿尔巴尼亚公司法之比较:是否需要改革?
上市公司是一种发明,它使企业家能够筹集大量资金,为大型项目融资。如果不给予企业家有限责任的特权,这些巨额资金就无法动员起来。有限责任会让他们有勇气将投资者提出的资金投入到项目中,而这些项目有时会带来过高的失败风险。有限责任特权意味着失败的危险从企业家身上转移到了投资者身上。由于承担失败成本的这种转变,企业家将有动机滥用有限责任特权,损害投资者的利益,无论是股东还是债权人。法律应该保护公司的债权人,还是债权人应该自己照顾自己?如果是,法律应该提供多少保护?保护这群投资者有什么好处吗?在欧洲层面,第二公司法指令是否为保护债权人提供了机制?阿尔巴尼亚公司法是否提供了第二指令所要求的基本债权人保护机制?我们试图回答这些问题,并在本文结束时就如何更好地将阿尔巴尼亚公司法与第二指令保持一致提出一些建议,以保护债权人的利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信