EU Company Law Harmonization Between Convergence and Varieties of Capitalism

Martin Gelter
{"title":"EU Company Law Harmonization Between Convergence and Varieties of Capitalism","authors":"Martin Gelter","doi":"10.4337/9781784717667.00020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter sketches the history of EU Company Law, from its beginnings in the 1960s until today. Throughout all periods, EU company law harmonization was largely a top-down, technocratic project that was considered imperative to realize the common market. In other words, it was promoted mainly by the European Commission and experts advising it without any particular business or investment interest group pushing for harmonization. Scholars are divided about the success of the project, with opinions ranging from it being a great success story to the claim that EU company law harmonization is largely trivial. \n \nThis chapter suggests that that the development of EU company law can be understood as reflecting two distinct periods of convergence in corporate law, even if that convergence has often been limited to specific issues and sometimes remained restricted to the formal level. Company law harmonization efforts mirror prevailing fashions about what is considered good corporate law. Each of these periods is roughly linked to the success of a particular model of capitalism that seemed to be on the ascendancy at the respective time. This first period was characterized by a dominance of the German model, and a vision of corporate law that one could characterize as belonging to a “coordinated” variety of capitalism, when shareholder value maximization was not yet the prime directive of corporate law. The second period began in the late 1990s and partly coincides with the “convergence in corporate governance” debate. Harmonization efforts focused on enabling choice for shareholders based on transparency and information. This period was dominated by liberal capitalism oriented toward shareholders and increasingly the stock markets. Germany’s position as the model jurisdiction was increasingly taken over by the UK. \n \nEU Company law harmonization has always been in the balance between top-down proposals coming from the center and national resistance. In the early period, when company law harmonization was influenced mainly by Continental models, the UK stepped on the brakes after joining the EEC in 1973 whereas since the 2000s Germany and other Continental jurisdictions have been the main source of resistance. Because of Member State options and the ability to avoid company rules, convergence has remained formal and superficial, but not entirely irrelevant.","PeriodicalId":230168,"journal":{"name":"CGN: Intellectual History of Corporate Governance Field (Topic)","volume":"235 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CGN: Intellectual History of Corporate Governance Field (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784717667.00020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

This chapter sketches the history of EU Company Law, from its beginnings in the 1960s until today. Throughout all periods, EU company law harmonization was largely a top-down, technocratic project that was considered imperative to realize the common market. In other words, it was promoted mainly by the European Commission and experts advising it without any particular business or investment interest group pushing for harmonization. Scholars are divided about the success of the project, with opinions ranging from it being a great success story to the claim that EU company law harmonization is largely trivial. This chapter suggests that that the development of EU company law can be understood as reflecting two distinct periods of convergence in corporate law, even if that convergence has often been limited to specific issues and sometimes remained restricted to the formal level. Company law harmonization efforts mirror prevailing fashions about what is considered good corporate law. Each of these periods is roughly linked to the success of a particular model of capitalism that seemed to be on the ascendancy at the respective time. This first period was characterized by a dominance of the German model, and a vision of corporate law that one could characterize as belonging to a “coordinated” variety of capitalism, when shareholder value maximization was not yet the prime directive of corporate law. The second period began in the late 1990s and partly coincides with the “convergence in corporate governance” debate. Harmonization efforts focused on enabling choice for shareholders based on transparency and information. This period was dominated by liberal capitalism oriented toward shareholders and increasingly the stock markets. Germany’s position as the model jurisdiction was increasingly taken over by the UK. EU Company law harmonization has always been in the balance between top-down proposals coming from the center and national resistance. In the early period, when company law harmonization was influenced mainly by Continental models, the UK stepped on the brakes after joining the EEC in 1973 whereas since the 2000s Germany and other Continental jurisdictions have been the main source of resistance. Because of Member State options and the ability to avoid company rules, convergence has remained formal and superficial, but not entirely irrelevant.
资本主义趋同与多样性的欧盟公司法协调
本章概述了欧盟公司法的历史,从20世纪60年代开始直到今天。在所有时期,欧盟公司法的协调在很大程度上是一个自上而下的技术官僚项目,被认为是实现共同市场的必要条件。换句话说,它主要是由欧盟委员会(European Commission)和提供建议的专家推动的,没有任何特定的商业或投资利益集团推动统一。学者们对该项目的成功看法不一,有人认为这是一个伟大的成功故事,也有人认为欧盟公司法的协调在很大程度上微不足道。本章表明,欧盟公司法的发展可以被理解为反映了公司法的两个不同的趋同时期,即使这种趋同往往局限于具体问题,有时仍然局限于正式层面。公司法协调的努力反映了关于什么是好的公司法的流行时尚。这些时期中的每一个都与某种特定的资本主义模式的成功大致相关,这种模式在各自的时间里似乎处于优势地位。第一个时期的特点是德国模式的主导地位,以及一种公司法的愿景,人们可以将其描述为属于资本主义的“协调”变种,当时股东价值最大化还不是公司法的主要指导。第二阶段始于上世纪90年代末,在一定程度上与“公司治理趋同”的辩论相吻合。协调工作的重点是在透明度和信息的基础上使股东能够作出选择。这一时期以自由资本主义为主导,以股东为导向,股票市场也越来越多。德国作为模范司法管辖区的地位逐渐被英国取代。欧盟公司法的协调一直处于中央自上而下的建议和国家抵制之间的平衡之中。在早期,公司法的协调主要受欧洲大陆模式的影响,英国在1973年加入欧洲经济共同体后踩下了刹车,而自2000年代以来,德国和其他欧洲大陆司法管辖区一直是阻力的主要来源。由于会员国的选择和避免公司规则的能力,趋同仍然是形式上和表面上的,但并非完全无关紧要。
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