Adoption of Shareholder Resolutions in Post-COVID Era. Example of Estonian Law

Andres Vutt, Margit Vutt
{"title":"Adoption of Shareholder Resolutions in Post-COVID Era. Example of Estonian Law","authors":"Andres Vutt, Margit Vutt","doi":"10.22364/iscflul.8.2.31","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic forced the world to find the right balance between protecting health, minimizing economic and social disruption and retaining the rights of individuals. States imposed a number of restrictions in order to prevent the spread of the pandemic, including restrictions on the movement of persons and restrictions on gathering. Traditionally, shareholders' meetings of companies have been taken place in the form of physical meetings. Company law also been based on the assumption that meetings are held physically. In the new situation, it was no longer possible to hold meetings in this way, at least for some time. This forced companies to use digital solutions. The legislator was also faced with the question of how to resolve this situation. Different countries reacted differently in order to find company law solutions. In Estonia, new rules were adopted in May 2020 that allowed legal persons to adopt decisions using digital solutions, among other things, it is allowed to make decisions in a full virtual meeting. The central question in the way companies make decisions is whether the use of virtual solutions is possible, but whether the law provides companies with sufficiently flexible options, which would enable decisions to be taken in the light of the specificities and needs of each company and whether such practices ensure the exercise of shareholders' rights. This article analyses whether and how these objectives have been achieved in Estonian law. There are three ways to adopt company’s resolutions in Estonia: a meeting, a written resolution or a vote by letter. Meetings can take place physically, virtually or in a hybrid form. It is not possible to infringe the rights of the shareholder in making a written resolution, since if such a method is used, the resolution decision is adopted only if all shareholders agree. In the case of voting by letter, the law does not take into account the fact that in a shareholder of a public limited company has the right to receive information from directors only at the general meeting. Therefore, the future case-law must lay down the principles of communication between the shareholder and the public limited company in the situation when the resolution has been adopted by using such option. The law stipulates that if digital means are used to hold a meeting, shareholders must be guaranteed all the same rights as they have in the event of a physical meeting. Since these rules have been in force only for a short period of time, there are no court cases based on them. Although the legal literature has been expressed some views on the use of digital solutions, it is not yet known how the courts will resolve these issues if disputes arise.","PeriodicalId":314457,"journal":{"name":"New Legal Reality: Challenges and Perspectives. II","volume":"139 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Legal Reality: Challenges and Perspectives. II","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22364/iscflul.8.2.31","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

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic forced the world to find the right balance between protecting health, minimizing economic and social disruption and retaining the rights of individuals. States imposed a number of restrictions in order to prevent the spread of the pandemic, including restrictions on the movement of persons and restrictions on gathering. Traditionally, shareholders' meetings of companies have been taken place in the form of physical meetings. Company law also been based on the assumption that meetings are held physically. In the new situation, it was no longer possible to hold meetings in this way, at least for some time. This forced companies to use digital solutions. The legislator was also faced with the question of how to resolve this situation. Different countries reacted differently in order to find company law solutions. In Estonia, new rules were adopted in May 2020 that allowed legal persons to adopt decisions using digital solutions, among other things, it is allowed to make decisions in a full virtual meeting. The central question in the way companies make decisions is whether the use of virtual solutions is possible, but whether the law provides companies with sufficiently flexible options, which would enable decisions to be taken in the light of the specificities and needs of each company and whether such practices ensure the exercise of shareholders' rights. This article analyses whether and how these objectives have been achieved in Estonian law. There are three ways to adopt company’s resolutions in Estonia: a meeting, a written resolution or a vote by letter. Meetings can take place physically, virtually or in a hybrid form. It is not possible to infringe the rights of the shareholder in making a written resolution, since if such a method is used, the resolution decision is adopted only if all shareholders agree. In the case of voting by letter, the law does not take into account the fact that in a shareholder of a public limited company has the right to receive information from directors only at the general meeting. Therefore, the future case-law must lay down the principles of communication between the shareholder and the public limited company in the situation when the resolution has been adopted by using such option. The law stipulates that if digital means are used to hold a meeting, shareholders must be guaranteed all the same rights as they have in the event of a physical meeting. Since these rules have been in force only for a short period of time, there are no court cases based on them. Although the legal literature has been expressed some views on the use of digital solutions, it is not yet known how the courts will resolve these issues if disputes arise.
后疫情时代股东决议的通过。爱沙尼亚法律的例子
2020年,2019冠状病毒病大流行迫使世界在保护健康、尽量减少经济和社会干扰以及保留个人权利之间找到适当的平衡。各国实施了一些限制措施,以防止大流行病的蔓延,包括限制人员流动和限制集会。传统上,公司股东大会以实体会议的形式举行。公司法也建立在会议是实际举行的假设基础上。在新的情况下,至少在一段时间内不可能再以这种方式举行会议。这迫使企业使用数字解决方案。立法者还面临着如何解决这种情况的问题。为了找到公司法的解决方案,不同的国家做出了不同的反应。在爱沙尼亚,2020年5月通过了新规则,允许法人使用数字解决方案做出决策,除其他外,还允许在完全虚拟会议中做出决策。公司决策方式的核心问题是是否可能使用虚拟解决方案,但法律是否为公司提供了足够灵活的选择,使其能够根据每个公司的具体情况和需求做出决策,以及这种做法是否确保股东权利的行使。本文分析爱沙尼亚法律是否以及如何实现了这些目标。在爱沙尼亚,通过公司决议有三种方式:会议、书面决议或信函投票。会议可以以物理形式、虚拟形式或混合形式进行。书面决议不可能侵犯股东的权利,因为如果采用这种方式,只有全体股东同意才能通过决议。在以书面表决的情况下,法律没有考虑到公众有限公司的股东只有在股东大会上才有权从董事那里获得信息。因此,未来的判例法必须规定股东与有限责任公司在采用该选择权的情况下的沟通原则。该法律规定,如果以数字方式召开股东大会,必须保证股东享有与实体会议时相同的权利。由于这些规则只生效了很短的时间,因此没有基于它们的法庭案件。虽然法律文献对数字解决方案的使用表达了一些看法,但尚不清楚如果出现争议,法院将如何解决这些问题。
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