劳埃德案的判决:对实践有启发,但对法律没有启发

IF 1.2 4区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Edward Walker-Arnott
{"title":"劳埃德案的判决:对实践有启发,但对法律没有启发","authors":"Edward Walker-Arnott","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Lloyds case concerned the 2009 acquisition of HBOS. Shareholders sued 5 directors for losses sustained by them. It was the first case in the UK arising out of the financial crisis of 2008/2009 which went to full trial, with cross- examination of defendant directors, advisers and expert witnesses. It was also the first minority shareholder group litigation case brought against the directors of a listed company pursued through trial to judgment. The 280 page judgment provides an insight into the processes of listed company takeovers. It might have provided illumination of directors’ duties and of the reflective loss principle, which denies shareholders recovery where the company has a claim on the same facts. It did not: and the case gives attention to two reported cases which have long since lost authority.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"20 1","pages":"579 - 597"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Lloyds case judgment: illuminating on practice but not on law\",\"authors\":\"Edward Walker-Arnott\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Lloyds case concerned the 2009 acquisition of HBOS. Shareholders sued 5 directors for losses sustained by them. It was the first case in the UK arising out of the financial crisis of 2008/2009 which went to full trial, with cross- examination of defendant directors, advisers and expert witnesses. It was also the first minority shareholder group litigation case brought against the directors of a listed company pursued through trial to judgment. The 280 page judgment provides an insight into the processes of listed company takeovers. It might have provided illumination of directors’ duties and of the reflective loss principle, which denies shareholders recovery where the company has a claim on the same facts. It did not: and the case gives attention to two reported cases which have long since lost authority.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Corporate Law Studies\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"579 - 597\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Corporate Law Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

劳埃德案涉及2009年收购HBOS。股东们起诉了5名董事,要求赔偿他们遭受的损失。这是英国2008/2009年金融危机引发的第一起全面审理的案件,被告董事、顾问和专家证人都接受了交叉询问。这也是上市公司少数股东针对董事提起的集体诉讼案件中,第一起经过审判至判决的案件。这份280页的判决书提供了对上市公司收购流程的洞察。它本可以阐明董事的职责和反思损失原则,即在公司对同一事实提出索赔的情况下,拒绝向股东追偿。但事实并非如此:而且这个案件引起了人们对两起早已失去权威的报道案件的关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Lloyds case judgment: illuminating on practice but not on law
ABSTRACT The Lloyds case concerned the 2009 acquisition of HBOS. Shareholders sued 5 directors for losses sustained by them. It was the first case in the UK arising out of the financial crisis of 2008/2009 which went to full trial, with cross- examination of defendant directors, advisers and expert witnesses. It was also the first minority shareholder group litigation case brought against the directors of a listed company pursued through trial to judgment. The 280 page judgment provides an insight into the processes of listed company takeovers. It might have provided illumination of directors’ duties and of the reflective loss principle, which denies shareholders recovery where the company has a claim on the same facts. It did not: and the case gives attention to two reported cases which have long since lost authority.
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
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
18
×
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