公允价值概念下的评估权如何发挥协同作用?:日本的经验教训

Q3 Social Sciences
Hidefusa Iida
{"title":"公允价值概念下的评估权如何发挥协同作用?:日本的经验教训","authors":"Hidefusa Iida","doi":"10.1017/asjcl.2023.22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article presents how the appraisal right, with the concept of the fair value which includes synergies, has worked in Japanese corporate law. The appraisal right gives dissenting shareholders the ability to protect their interests. The Delaware courts calculate a fair value by excluding synergy effects in appraisal proceedings. One can criticise the exclusion of synergies because the petitioners of the appraisal right might receive less than the merger price. It would be interesting to analyse how the situation changes if the fair value includes synergies. Japanese corporate law gives a good illustration for this. The revision of the Companies Act of Japan in 2005 enhanced the role of the appraisal right by empowering the Court to include synergy value into the determination of fair value. However, Japan's Court developed the doctrine to use the deal price as a fair value with a relatively lax review of the fairness of the deal process. This has resulted in an unattractive situation for petitioners of appraisal remedies, because they rarely gain profits through the appraisal remedy. Empowering minorities in black letter law does not necessarily strengthen minority protection in reality.","PeriodicalId":39405,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Comparative Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How does the Appraisal Right with the Concept of the Fair Value Including Synergies Work?: Lessons from Japan\",\"authors\":\"Hidefusa Iida\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/asjcl.2023.22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article presents how the appraisal right, with the concept of the fair value which includes synergies, has worked in Japanese corporate law. The appraisal right gives dissenting shareholders the ability to protect their interests. The Delaware courts calculate a fair value by excluding synergy effects in appraisal proceedings. One can criticise the exclusion of synergies because the petitioners of the appraisal right might receive less than the merger price. It would be interesting to analyse how the situation changes if the fair value includes synergies. Japanese corporate law gives a good illustration for this. The revision of the Companies Act of Japan in 2005 enhanced the role of the appraisal right by empowering the Court to include synergy value into the determination of fair value. However, Japan's Court developed the doctrine to use the deal price as a fair value with a relatively lax review of the fairness of the deal process. This has resulted in an unattractive situation for petitioners of appraisal remedies, because they rarely gain profits through the appraisal remedy. Empowering minorities in black letter law does not necessarily strengthen minority protection in reality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39405,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Journal of Comparative Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Journal of Comparative Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/asjcl.2023.22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/asjcl.2023.22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文介绍了在包含协同效应的公允价值概念下,评价权如何在日本公司法中发挥作用。评估权赋予持不同意见的股东保护自身利益的能力。特拉华州法院通过排除评估程序中的协同效应来计算公允价值。人们可以批评排除协同效应的做法,因为评估权的请愿者可能会收到低于合并价格的东西。如果公允价值包括协同效应,那么分析情况如何变化将是一件有趣的事情。日本公司法就是一个很好的例子。2005年修订的《日本公司法》赋予法院将协同价值纳入公允价值确定的权力,强化了评价权的作用。然而,日本法院发展了一种原则,即使用交易价格作为公允价值,对交易过程的公平性审查相对宽松。这就造成了一种没有吸引力的情况,因为他们很少通过评估补救办法获得利益。黑体字法律赋予少数群体权力,在现实中未必能加强对少数群体的保护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How does the Appraisal Right with the Concept of the Fair Value Including Synergies Work?: Lessons from Japan
This article presents how the appraisal right, with the concept of the fair value which includes synergies, has worked in Japanese corporate law. The appraisal right gives dissenting shareholders the ability to protect their interests. The Delaware courts calculate a fair value by excluding synergy effects in appraisal proceedings. One can criticise the exclusion of synergies because the petitioners of the appraisal right might receive less than the merger price. It would be interesting to analyse how the situation changes if the fair value includes synergies. Japanese corporate law gives a good illustration for this. The revision of the Companies Act of Japan in 2005 enhanced the role of the appraisal right by empowering the Court to include synergy value into the determination of fair value. However, Japan's Court developed the doctrine to use the deal price as a fair value with a relatively lax review of the fairness of the deal process. This has resulted in an unattractive situation for petitioners of appraisal remedies, because they rarely gain profits through the appraisal remedy. Empowering minorities in black letter law does not necessarily strengthen minority protection in reality.
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
Asian Journal of Comparative Law
Asian Journal of Comparative Law Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The Asian Journal of Comparative Law (AsJCL) is the leading forum for research and discussion of the law and legal systems of Asia. It embraces work that is theoretical, empirical, socio-legal, doctrinal or comparative that relates to one or more Asian legal systems, as well as work that compares one or more Asian legal systems with non-Asian systems. The Journal seeks articles which display an intimate knowledge of Asian legal systems, and thus provide a window into the way they work in practice. The AsJCL is an initiative of the Asian Law Institute (ASLI), an association established by thirteen leading law schools in Asia and with a rapidly expanding membership base across Asia and in other regions around the world.
×
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