企业的能力

Eva Micheler
{"title":"企业的能力","authors":"Eva Micheler","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198858874.003.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the ultra vires doctrine, under which the capacity of companies used to be limited by the objects stated in their memorandum. This doctrine could be justified through a concession style argument as well as through contractual analysis. The doctrine, however, proved unsuitable for the operation of commercial organizations. These organizations need flexibility, and the law adapted to the requirements of organizational action and now mandates that all non-charitable companies have unlimited capacity. The chapter then analyses the recent recommendation for companies to set themselves a purpose discouraging them form making the generation of financial return their primary objective. It argues that the programmatic statement of a corporate purpose is likely to bring about only cosmetic changes. If there is a desire for wider aims to be integrated into corporate decisions these would have to be institutionalized. This can be achieved, for example, by identifying a board member to represent these interests on the board.","PeriodicalId":10779,"journal":{"name":"Company Law","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Corporate Capacity\",\"authors\":\"Eva Micheler\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198858874.003.0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter examines the ultra vires doctrine, under which the capacity of companies used to be limited by the objects stated in their memorandum. This doctrine could be justified through a concession style argument as well as through contractual analysis. The doctrine, however, proved unsuitable for the operation of commercial organizations. These organizations need flexibility, and the law adapted to the requirements of organizational action and now mandates that all non-charitable companies have unlimited capacity. The chapter then analyses the recent recommendation for companies to set themselves a purpose discouraging them form making the generation of financial return their primary objective. It argues that the programmatic statement of a corporate purpose is likely to bring about only cosmetic changes. If there is a desire for wider aims to be integrated into corporate decisions these would have to be institutionalized. This can be achieved, for example, by identifying a board member to represent these interests on the board.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10779,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Company Law\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Company Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198858874.003.0003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Company Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198858874.003.0003","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

本章研究了越权原则,在该原则下,公司的能力过去受到其备忘录中所述目标的限制。这种学说可以通过让步式论证和契约分析来证明。然而,这一理论证明不适合商业组织的运作。这些组织需要灵活性,法律适应了组织行动的要求,现在规定所有非慈善公司都有无限的能力。然后,本章分析了最近的建议,建议公司为自己设定一个目标,阻止它们将产生财务回报作为主要目标。它认为,公司目标的纲领性声明可能只会带来表面上的改变。如果希望将更广泛的目标纳入公司决策,这些目标就必须制度化。这可以实现,例如,通过确定董事会成员在董事会中代表这些利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Corporate Capacity
This chapter examines the ultra vires doctrine, under which the capacity of companies used to be limited by the objects stated in their memorandum. This doctrine could be justified through a concession style argument as well as through contractual analysis. The doctrine, however, proved unsuitable for the operation of commercial organizations. These organizations need flexibility, and the law adapted to the requirements of organizational action and now mandates that all non-charitable companies have unlimited capacity. The chapter then analyses the recent recommendation for companies to set themselves a purpose discouraging them form making the generation of financial return their primary objective. It argues that the programmatic statement of a corporate purpose is likely to bring about only cosmetic changes. If there is a desire for wider aims to be integrated into corporate decisions these would have to be institutionalized. This can be achieved, for example, by identifying a board member to represent these interests on the board.
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