共同法院和仲裁法院(CCJA)关于公共事业执行豁免的判例法-现状?

Jules Masuku Ayikaba
{"title":"共同法院和仲裁法院(CCJA)关于公共事业执行豁免的判例法-现状?","authors":"Jules Masuku Ayikaba","doi":"10.5771/2363-6270-2022-2-223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study traces the evolution of the CCJA case law on the principle of exemption from enforcement for public companies. It aims in particular to highlight the direction in which this case law is moving. It appears that the CCJA has so far not succeeded in elaborating its own definition of the concept of “public companies”; yet it is there that, in our view, the mystery of the immunity from execution that it has long recognized to these companies hides; even when they were incorporated in the form of a corporation. However, over time, the Court has rightly reversed its previous decisions by moving from an extensive to a restrictive interpretation of exemption from enforcement. In any case, the involvement of the lawmaker is more than welcome in order to put an end to the situation of inequality, which has existed for a long time in terms of enforcement under OHADA law, between corporations having the State or its branches (public companies) as shareholders and those whose shareholders have no State participation.","PeriodicalId":121115,"journal":{"name":"Recht in Afrika","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"La jurisprudence de la Cour commune de justice et d’arbitrage (CCJA) sur l’immunité d’exécution au profit des entreprises publiques – Quo vadis?\",\"authors\":\"Jules Masuku Ayikaba\",\"doi\":\"10.5771/2363-6270-2022-2-223\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study traces the evolution of the CCJA case law on the principle of exemption from enforcement for public companies. It aims in particular to highlight the direction in which this case law is moving. It appears that the CCJA has so far not succeeded in elaborating its own definition of the concept of “public companies”; yet it is there that, in our view, the mystery of the immunity from execution that it has long recognized to these companies hides; even when they were incorporated in the form of a corporation. However, over time, the Court has rightly reversed its previous decisions by moving from an extensive to a restrictive interpretation of exemption from enforcement. In any case, the involvement of the lawmaker is more than welcome in order to put an end to the situation of inequality, which has existed for a long time in terms of enforcement under OHADA law, between corporations having the State or its branches (public companies) as shareholders and those whose shareholders have no State participation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":121115,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Recht in Afrika\",\"volume\":\"9 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\":\"Recht in Afrika\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5771/2363-6270-2022-2-223\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Recht in Afrika","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5771/2363-6270-2022-2-223","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究追溯了中国上市公司豁免执行原则判例法的演变过程。它特别旨在强调该判例法的发展方向。到目前为止,行政协商会似乎还没有成功地阐述自己对“上市公司”概念的定义;然而,在我们看来,正是在那里,它长期以来一直承认这些公司免于执行的奥秘隐藏了起来;即使他们是以公司的形式成立的。然而,随着时间的推移,法院正确地推翻了以前的决定,从对豁免执行的广泛解释转向了限制性解释。无论如何,议员的参与是非常受欢迎的,以便结束长期以来在执行《OHADA法》方面存在的以国家或其分支机构(公共公司)为股东的公司与那些股东没有国家参与的公司之间的不平等状况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
La jurisprudence de la Cour commune de justice et d’arbitrage (CCJA) sur l’immunité d’exécution au profit des entreprises publiques – Quo vadis?
This study traces the evolution of the CCJA case law on the principle of exemption from enforcement for public companies. It aims in particular to highlight the direction in which this case law is moving. It appears that the CCJA has so far not succeeded in elaborating its own definition of the concept of “public companies”; yet it is there that, in our view, the mystery of the immunity from execution that it has long recognized to these companies hides; even when they were incorporated in the form of a corporation. However, over time, the Court has rightly reversed its previous decisions by moving from an extensive to a restrictive interpretation of exemption from enforcement. In any case, the involvement of the lawmaker is more than welcome in order to put an end to the situation of inequality, which has existed for a long time in terms of enforcement under OHADA law, between corporations having the State or its branches (public companies) as shareholders and those whose shareholders have no State participation.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信