Bolstering creditor and shareholder protection under the South African and Zimbabwean amalgamation or merger regulatory regimes: Suggestions for company-law reform

Q3 Social Sciences South African law journal Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.47348/salj/v140/i4a6
Justice Mudzamiri
{"title":"Bolstering creditor and shareholder protection under the South African and Zimbabwean amalgamation or merger regulatory regimes: Suggestions for company-law reform","authors":"Justice Mudzamiri","doi":"10.47348/salj/v140/i4a6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article critically assesses the efficacy of the South African and Zimbabwean merger regulatory regimes in providing suitable shareholder and creditor protection. The article seeks to balance competing goals. On the one hand, merger opportunities should be promoted by reducing regulatory barriers to merger regulation by, for instance, facilitating the implementation of mergers through a less complex procedure and with reduced court interference. On the other hand, the merger regimes ought to guarantee the appropriate and adequate protection of creditors and shareholders, including minority shareholders’ interests. The article focuses on the two comprehensive target shareholder protections — participatory and remedial rights — and two creditor remedies — the creditors’ notice and the solvency and liquidity test. The study establishes that South Africa offers better protection to creditors and shareholders than Zimbabwe. However, in some respects, both jurisdictions can seek lessons from other progressive jurisdictions, including the United States of America, with the state of Delaware as a particular example, and the United Kingdom.","PeriodicalId":39313,"journal":{"name":"South African law journal","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African law journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47348/salj/v140/i4a6","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

Abstract

This article critically assesses the efficacy of the South African and Zimbabwean merger regulatory regimes in providing suitable shareholder and creditor protection. The article seeks to balance competing goals. On the one hand, merger opportunities should be promoted by reducing regulatory barriers to merger regulation by, for instance, facilitating the implementation of mergers through a less complex procedure and with reduced court interference. On the other hand, the merger regimes ought to guarantee the appropriate and adequate protection of creditors and shareholders, including minority shareholders’ interests. The article focuses on the two comprehensive target shareholder protections — participatory and remedial rights — and two creditor remedies — the creditors’ notice and the solvency and liquidity test. The study establishes that South Africa offers better protection to creditors and shareholders than Zimbabwe. However, in some respects, both jurisdictions can seek lessons from other progressive jurisdictions, including the United States of America, with the state of Delaware as a particular example, and the United Kingdom.
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
南非和津巴布韦合并或合并监管制度下加强债权人和股东保护:公司法改革建议
本文批判性地评估了南非和津巴布韦合并监管制度在提供适当的股东和债权人保护方面的效力。这篇文章试图平衡相互竞争的目标。一方面,应通过减少对合并监管的监管障碍来促进合并机会,例如,通过较不复杂的程序和减少法院干预来促进合并的实施。另一方面,合并制度应保证适当和充分地保护债权人和股东,包括少数股东的利益。本文重点研究了两种综合性的目标股东保护——参与权和救济权,以及两种债权人救济——债权人通知和偿付能力和流动性检验。研究表明,南非比津巴布韦对债权人和股东提供了更好的保护。然而,在某些方面,两个司法管辖区都可以从其他进步的司法管辖区,包括美利坚合众国(以特拉华州为特别例子)和联合王国汲取经验教训。
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
South African law journal
South African law journal Social Sciences-Law
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊最新文献
A legislative framework for shareholder approval of political donations and expenditure by companies in South Africa Reflecting on the tension between the development of the common law and the doctrine of separation of powers in Paulsen v Slip Knot Investments 777 (Pty) Ltd Notes: The Krugersdorp gang rapes — Another Tshabalala v S; Ntuli v S? Book Review: Tjakie Naudé & Daniel Visser (eds) The Future of the Law of Contract: Essays in Honour of Dale Hutchison (2021) The classification of a ‘maritime claim’ in South Africa under the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act
×
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