蝴蝶效应:一个看似微不足道的公司透明度提案的理论含义

Jonathan Hardman
{"title":"蝴蝶效应:一个看似微不足道的公司透明度提案的理论含义","authors":"Jonathan Hardman","doi":"10.1177/14737795211037701","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The UK government has proposed a seemingly minor change to the UK corporate transparency regime, being to require Companies House to verify the identity of new directors of companies, persons of significant control and those incorporating companies, to help in the fight against corporate crime. These proposals seem sensible and innocuous. However, there are a number of theoretical implications which flow from this seemingly minor change. First, it starts the process of making the UK corporate register an effective gatekeeper. Second, it involves the state more in the establishment and operation of the company, strengthening the argument that the corporate form somehow exists as a gift from the state. Third, shareholders are ignored, which challenges argumentation structures for those who believe in shareholder primacy. This illustrates how dependent ostensibly universal company law theory is on a particular doctrinal structure, and thus how exposed particular calibrations of arguments are to being undermined. Every time the UK government proposes a minor change to company law doctrine, the butterfly flaps her wings and those advancing existing company law argumentation structures must brace themselves.","PeriodicalId":87174,"journal":{"name":"Common law world review","volume":"15 17","pages":"180 - 197"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The butterfly effect: Theoretical implications of an apparently minor corporate transparency proposal\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Hardman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14737795211037701\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The UK government has proposed a seemingly minor change to the UK corporate transparency regime, being to require Companies House to verify the identity of new directors of companies, persons of significant control and those incorporating companies, to help in the fight against corporate crime. These proposals seem sensible and innocuous. However, there are a number of theoretical implications which flow from this seemingly minor change. First, it starts the process of making the UK corporate register an effective gatekeeper. Second, it involves the state more in the establishment and operation of the company, strengthening the argument that the corporate form somehow exists as a gift from the state. Third, shareholders are ignored, which challenges argumentation structures for those who believe in shareholder primacy. This illustrates how dependent ostensibly universal company law theory is on a particular doctrinal structure, and thus how exposed particular calibrations of arguments are to being undermined. Every time the UK government proposes a minor change to company law doctrine, the butterfly flaps her wings and those advancing existing company law argumentation structures must brace themselves.\",\"PeriodicalId\":87174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Common law world review\",\"volume\":\"15 17\",\"pages\":\"180 - 197\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Common law world review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14737795211037701\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Common law world review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14737795211037701","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

英国政府提议对英国企业透明度制度进行一项看似微小的改革,即要求公司注册处核实公司新董事、重大控制人和公司注册人的身份,以帮助打击企业犯罪。这些建议似乎合情合理,无伤大雅。然而,从这个看似微小的变化中产生了许多理论含义。首先,它启动了使英国公司注册成为有效看门人的进程。其次,它使国家更多地参与公司的建立和运营,从而加强了公司形式在某种程度上作为国家礼物而存在的论点。第三,股东被忽视,这对那些相信股东至上的人的论证结构构成了挑战。这说明了表面上普遍的公司法理论是如何依赖于特定的理论结构的,因此,特定的论证标准是如何被破坏的。每当英国政府提议对公司法原则进行细微修改时,蝴蝶就会扇动翅膀,那些推进现有公司法论证结构的人必须做好准备。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The butterfly effect: Theoretical implications of an apparently minor corporate transparency proposal
The UK government has proposed a seemingly minor change to the UK corporate transparency regime, being to require Companies House to verify the identity of new directors of companies, persons of significant control and those incorporating companies, to help in the fight against corporate crime. These proposals seem sensible and innocuous. However, there are a number of theoretical implications which flow from this seemingly minor change. First, it starts the process of making the UK corporate register an effective gatekeeper. Second, it involves the state more in the establishment and operation of the company, strengthening the argument that the corporate form somehow exists as a gift from the state. Third, shareholders are ignored, which challenges argumentation structures for those who believe in shareholder primacy. This illustrates how dependent ostensibly universal company law theory is on a particular doctrinal structure, and thus how exposed particular calibrations of arguments are to being undermined. Every time the UK government proposes a minor change to company law doctrine, the butterfly flaps her wings and those advancing existing company law argumentation structures must brace themselves.
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