‘Baby, It's Cold Outside…’ – A Comparative and Economic Analysis of Freeze-Outs of Minority Shareholders

Tom Vos
{"title":"‘Baby, It's Cold Outside…’ – A Comparative and Economic Analysis of Freeze-Outs of Minority Shareholders","authors":"Tom Vos","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2898461","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Because minority shareholders can be a nuisance for a company, a majority shareholder may want to freeze them out. In general, the approach in the United States towards freeze-outs is more flexible than in the European Union. Law and economics scholarship suggests that a flexible regime for freeze-outs may be beneficial for society, as it addresses a free rider problem and a holdout problem in the market for corporate control. However, these insights are rarely integrated into European legal scholarship. This article endeavours to determine what constitutes an efficient legal framework on freeze-outs through a comparative law and economics approach. First, the legal regime on freeze-outs in the United States is compared with the regime of the Takeover Directive in the European Union and with Dutch law. Then, these legal systems are evaluated on their efficiency. Finally, some suggestions of reform are made for the European Union.","PeriodicalId":171289,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Law: Corporate Governance Law eJournal","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Law: Corporate Governance Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2898461","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

Because minority shareholders can be a nuisance for a company, a majority shareholder may want to freeze them out. In general, the approach in the United States towards freeze-outs is more flexible than in the European Union. Law and economics scholarship suggests that a flexible regime for freeze-outs may be beneficial for society, as it addresses a free rider problem and a holdout problem in the market for corporate control. However, these insights are rarely integrated into European legal scholarship. This article endeavours to determine what constitutes an efficient legal framework on freeze-outs through a comparative law and economics approach. First, the legal regime on freeze-outs in the United States is compared with the regime of the Takeover Directive in the European Union and with Dutch law. Then, these legal systems are evaluated on their efficiency. Finally, some suggestions of reform are made for the European Union.
“宝贝,外面很冷……”——对中小股东股权冻结的比较与经济分析
因为小股东可能会给公司带来麻烦,大股东可能想把他们排除在外。总的来说,美国对冻结的做法比欧盟更灵活。法律和经济学研究表明,一个灵活的冻结机制可能对社会有益,因为它解决了企业控制市场中的搭便车问题和顽固问题。然而,这些见解很少被纳入欧洲法律学术。本文试图通过比较法和经济学的方法来确定什么是关于冻结的有效法律框架。首先,将美国关于冻结的法律制度与欧盟的《接管指令》制度以及荷兰法律进行比较。然后,对这些法律体系的效率进行评估。最后,对欧盟的改革提出了一些建议。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信