公司法中反对法定菜单的案例

Daniel M. Häusermann
{"title":"公司法中反对法定菜单的案例","authors":"Daniel M. Häusermann","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2024876","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There seems to be a virtual consensus among corporate law scholars that state legislatures should enable corporations to select governance terms from a menu of predefined statutory rules. In this Article, I challenge this view. The private sector has produced menus of contract terms, such as standard form contracts and model documents, long before the idea of statutory menus became fashionable. There is no evidence that the market for private menus has failed, and legislatures are unlikely to be efficient menu producers. Advocates of statutory menus have suggested a number of rationales, most notably considerations based on transaction costs, network and learning effects, bounded attention, or endogenous preferences. But at closer look, none of these justifications are plausible, if nothing else because they equally apply to private menus. The existing statutory menus do, however, clarify that certain governance terms are legal in cases where this would otherwise be uncertain. Yet that uncertainty should be reduced by other means than menus. For these reasons, menu production should be left to the private sector.","PeriodicalId":277132,"journal":{"name":"University of St.Gallen Law School","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Case Against Statutory Menus in Corporate Law\",\"authors\":\"Daniel M. Häusermann\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2024876\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There seems to be a virtual consensus among corporate law scholars that state legislatures should enable corporations to select governance terms from a menu of predefined statutory rules. In this Article, I challenge this view. The private sector has produced menus of contract terms, such as standard form contracts and model documents, long before the idea of statutory menus became fashionable. There is no evidence that the market for private menus has failed, and legislatures are unlikely to be efficient menu producers. Advocates of statutory menus have suggested a number of rationales, most notably considerations based on transaction costs, network and learning effects, bounded attention, or endogenous preferences. But at closer look, none of these justifications are plausible, if nothing else because they equally apply to private menus. The existing statutory menus do, however, clarify that certain governance terms are legal in cases where this would otherwise be uncertain. Yet that uncertainty should be reduced by other means than menus. For these reasons, menu production should be left to the private sector.\",\"PeriodicalId\":277132,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University of St.Gallen Law School\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-03-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University of St.Gallen Law School\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2024876\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of St.Gallen Law School","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2024876","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

公司法学者似乎达成了一种实质上的共识,即州立法机构应该允许公司从预先确定的法定规则菜单中选择治理术语。在这篇文章中,我对这种观点提出了挑战。早在法定菜单的概念变得流行之前,私营部门就已经制定了合同条款清单,比如标准格式的合同和示范文件。没有证据表明私人菜单市场已经失败,立法机构也不太可能成为高效的菜单生产者。法定菜单的倡导者提出了许多理由,最明显的是基于交易成本、网络和学习效应、有限注意力或内生偏好的考虑。但仔细一看,这些理由都站不住脚,因为它们同样适用于私人菜单。然而,现有的法定菜单确实澄清了某些治理术语在不确定的情况下是合法的。然而,这种不确定性应该通过菜单以外的其他方式来减少。出于这些原因,菜单的制作应该留给私营部门。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Case Against Statutory Menus in Corporate Law
There seems to be a virtual consensus among corporate law scholars that state legislatures should enable corporations to select governance terms from a menu of predefined statutory rules. In this Article, I challenge this view. The private sector has produced menus of contract terms, such as standard form contracts and model documents, long before the idea of statutory menus became fashionable. There is no evidence that the market for private menus has failed, and legislatures are unlikely to be efficient menu producers. Advocates of statutory menus have suggested a number of rationales, most notably considerations based on transaction costs, network and learning effects, bounded attention, or endogenous preferences. But at closer look, none of these justifications are plausible, if nothing else because they equally apply to private menus. The existing statutory menus do, however, clarify that certain governance terms are legal in cases where this would otherwise be uncertain. Yet that uncertainty should be reduced by other means than menus. For these reasons, menu production should be left to the private sector.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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