Shareholder Primacy, Labour and the Historic Ambivalence of UK Company Law

Marc T. Moore
{"title":"Shareholder Primacy, Labour and the Historic Ambivalence of UK Company Law","authors":"Marc T. Moore","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2835990","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most directors and senior managers of UK companies would likely regard it as trite law that, in undertaking their managerial and/or control functions, they are accountable first and foremost to their employer firm’s general body of shareholders. It follows that the interests of other corporate constituencies – and, in particular, those of employees – must ultimately cede to those of shareholders in the event of conflict. Although frequently taken for granted today, the lexical priority that the British company law framework affords to the interests of shareholders over those of other corporate constituencies is remarkable, not least when viewed alongside the correspondingly disempowered corporate governance status of labour in the UK. However, whilst the centrality of shareholders’ interests to the doctrinal and normative fabric of contemporary UK company law is both manifest and incontrovertible, this has curiously not always been the case. In this paper I argue that, whilst UK company law might look substantively stable and well-settled on its surface today, on closer inspection this facade of apparent calm can be seen to mask a fairly recent history of doctrinal and ideological turbulence with regard to fundamental underlying concerns. There is thus cause to question whether the basic normative impetus of the UK’s company law framework is as complementary to its surrounding economic and socio-political context as might first appear.","PeriodicalId":255520,"journal":{"name":"English & Commonwealth Law eJournal","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English & Commonwealth Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2835990","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Most directors and senior managers of UK companies would likely regard it as trite law that, in undertaking their managerial and/or control functions, they are accountable first and foremost to their employer firm’s general body of shareholders. It follows that the interests of other corporate constituencies – and, in particular, those of employees – must ultimately cede to those of shareholders in the event of conflict. Although frequently taken for granted today, the lexical priority that the British company law framework affords to the interests of shareholders over those of other corporate constituencies is remarkable, not least when viewed alongside the correspondingly disempowered corporate governance status of labour in the UK. However, whilst the centrality of shareholders’ interests to the doctrinal and normative fabric of contemporary UK company law is both manifest and incontrovertible, this has curiously not always been the case. In this paper I argue that, whilst UK company law might look substantively stable and well-settled on its surface today, on closer inspection this facade of apparent calm can be seen to mask a fairly recent history of doctrinal and ideological turbulence with regard to fundamental underlying concerns. There is thus cause to question whether the basic normative impetus of the UK’s company law framework is as complementary to its surrounding economic and socio-political context as might first appear.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
股东至上、劳工与英国公司法的历史矛盾
英国公司的大多数董事和高级管理人员可能会认为,在履行管理和/或控制职能时,他们首先要对雇主公司的全体股东负责,这是老生常谈的法律。由此可见,在发生冲突的情况下,其他企业支持者的利益——尤其是员工的利益——最终必须让位给股东。尽管如今经常被视为理所当然,但英国公司法框架在词汇上给予股东利益高于其他公司利益的优先地位是值得注意的,尤其是在与英国劳工的公司治理地位相应被剥夺的情况下。然而,尽管股东利益在当代英国公司法的理论和规范结构中处于中心地位,这既是显而易见的,也是无可争议的,但奇怪的是,情况并非总是如此。在本文中,我认为,虽然英国公司法在表面上可能看起来相当稳定和完善,但仔细观察这种表面上的平静,可以看出,在基本潜在问题方面,这种表面上的平静掩盖了相当近的一段理论和意识形态动荡的历史。因此,我们有理由质疑,英国公司法框架的基本规范动力,是否像最初看起来那样,与周围的经济和社会政治背景相辅相成。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pith and Marrow is Dead… Long Live Pith and Marrow: The Doctrine of Equivalents After Actavis THE ATO TR 2021/D4 - Taxation of Software Payments as Royalties - Comments on the Draft Ruling The Internal Market: An Historical Perspective AI in the Boardroom: Let the Law be in the Driving Seat Back to School - and After
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1