Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14735970.2022.2040815
Yanzhe Li
ABSTRACT Equity crowdfunding (ECF) provides small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with affordable access to funds, but it may expose investors to various risks. To promote capital formation for SMEs while maintaining adequate investor protection, the US has adopted a special ECF regime under the JOBS Act of 2012 and more recently made some amendments to it. However, two key problems of this regime remain to be addressed. One lies in the mandated issuer disclosures under the crowdfunding exemption. The other relates to the unduly burdensome funding portal regime. This article turns to the regulation of ECF in the UK to explore whether it has anything for the US to learn from. The comparative analysis demonstrates that, despite some high-level similarities, the two regimes have notable differences that determine the different impacts on ECF market actors. Drawing insights from the UK experience, the article makes recommendations for improving the US regime.
{"title":"The regulation of equity crowdfunding in the US: remaining concerns and lessons from the UK","authors":"Yanzhe Li","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2022.2040815","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2022.2040815","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Equity crowdfunding (ECF) provides small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with affordable access to funds, but it may expose investors to various risks. To promote capital formation for SMEs while maintaining adequate investor protection, the US has adopted a special ECF regime under the JOBS Act of 2012 and more recently made some amendments to it. However, two key problems of this regime remain to be addressed. One lies in the mandated issuer disclosures under the crowdfunding exemption. The other relates to the unduly burdensome funding portal regime. This article turns to the regulation of ECF in the UK to explore whether it has anything for the US to learn from. The comparative analysis demonstrates that, despite some high-level similarities, the two regimes have notable differences that determine the different impacts on ECF market actors. Drawing insights from the UK experience, the article makes recommendations for improving the US regime.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"265 - 298"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41953774","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14735970.2022.2067023
C. Weng, Arena Jingjing Hu
ABSTRACT The dual-class structure tends to increase the agency costs associated with concentrated ownership, such as those stemming from self-dealing and poor-quality management. While corporate law addresses some agency problems, it is unable to eliminate all agency problems without unduly restricting the freedom of corporate controllers to manage their firms. This article uses theory-based and empirical approaches to demonstrate that a specific type of sunset clause may strike the right balance between, on the one hand, addressing agency problems and, on the other hand, providing an effective incentive for controllers of dual-class companies to increase firm value over the long term. The article evaluates current regulatory responses to the dual-class structure in selected jurisdictions and concludes that the existing arguments against mandatory sunset rules may be flawed. We suggest that a time-based sunset rule may be suitable for high-tech and innovation startups characterised by high-growth rates and low profitability.
{"title":"Every sunset is an opportunity to reset: an analysis of dual-class share regulations and sunset clauses","authors":"C. Weng, Arena Jingjing Hu","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2022.2067023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2022.2067023","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The dual-class structure tends to increase the agency costs associated with concentrated ownership, such as those stemming from self-dealing and poor-quality management. While corporate law addresses some agency problems, it is unable to eliminate all agency problems without unduly restricting the freedom of corporate controllers to manage their firms. This article uses theory-based and empirical approaches to demonstrate that a specific type of sunset clause may strike the right balance between, on the one hand, addressing agency problems and, on the other hand, providing an effective incentive for controllers of dual-class companies to increase firm value over the long term. The article evaluates current regulatory responses to the dual-class structure in selected jurisdictions and concludes that the existing arguments against mandatory sunset rules may be flawed. We suggest that a time-based sunset rule may be suitable for high-tech and innovation startups characterised by high-growth rates and low profitability.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"571 - 603"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49644899","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14735970.2021.1995972
Qin Zhou
ABSTRACT This article uses the banking wealth management market to illustrate how the Chinese government intervened in the banking sector involved in crisis response reform packages. It argues that the regulatory processes regarding the banking wealth management market before and after 2015 support the crisis-driven regulation hypothesis. This article finds that the Chinese government’s initial response was to strengthen enforcement; it also made significant changes in legislation, including the redefinition of related products, classification of investors, and adding more mandatory disclosure rules. Finally, the Chinese government adjusted its financial supervisory architecture. It further compares the Chinese government’s regulatory strategies responding to the 2015 domestic systemic risk crisis with those adopted by its counterparts in developed countries following the 2008 global financial crisis. This article argues that the Chinese government purposefully adjusted regulatory strategies to regain control over state-owned banks and promote state-led financialisation.
{"title":"Crisis-driven regulation: evidence from engineering China’s banking wealth management market","authors":"Qin Zhou","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2021.1995972","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2021.1995972","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article uses the banking wealth management market to illustrate how the Chinese government intervened in the banking sector involved in crisis response reform packages. It argues that the regulatory processes regarding the banking wealth management market before and after 2015 support the crisis-driven regulation hypothesis. This article finds that the Chinese government’s initial response was to strengthen enforcement; it also made significant changes in legislation, including the redefinition of related products, classification of investors, and adding more mandatory disclosure rules. Finally, the Chinese government adjusted its financial supervisory architecture. It further compares the Chinese government’s regulatory strategies responding to the 2015 domestic systemic risk crisis with those adopted by its counterparts in developed countries following the 2008 global financial crisis. This article argues that the Chinese government purposefully adjusted regulatory strategies to regain control over state-owned banks and promote state-led financialisation.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"535 - 569"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48536723","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14735970.2021.2012883
Alan K. Koh
ABSTRACT Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are important to most economies, but the laws of close corporation entities used by SMEs are underrepresented in comparative corporate law scholarship. This Article critically analyses ‘withdrawal’ regimes in Germany's GmbH (Austritt aus wichtigem Grund) and the UK's private company limited by shares (unfair prejudice remedy) that respond to shareholder conflicts in close corporations. Comparative analysis reveals how the two jurisdictions differ in treatment of ‘non-fault’ scenarios and their underlying visions of shareholder protection. Potential reform of the UK's withdrawal regime based on German and Singapore law is also explored.
{"title":"Shareholder withdrawal in close corporations: an Anglo-German comparative analysis","authors":"Alan K. Koh","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2021.2012883","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2021.2012883","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are important to most economies, but the laws of close corporation entities used by SMEs are underrepresented in comparative corporate law scholarship. This Article critically analyses ‘withdrawal’ regimes in Germany's GmbH (Austritt aus wichtigem Grund) and the UK's private company limited by shares (unfair prejudice remedy) that respond to shareholder conflicts in close corporations. Comparative analysis reveals how the two jurisdictions differ in treatment of ‘non-fault’ scenarios and their underlying visions of shareholder protection. Potential reform of the UK's withdrawal regime based on German and Singapore law is also explored.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"197 - 228"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46389132","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14735970.2022.2107075
James Si Zeng
ABSTRACT This article examines how China, a developing country with relatively weak judicial capacity, regulates related-party transactions (RPTs). Although Chinese courts can block unfair RPTs that involve non-financial assets, they generally lack the capacity to evaluate the fairness of RPTs involving financial assets. In recent years, China has developed new regulatory strategies, including shareholder litigation brought by the Chinese Securities Investor Service Center, ex ante approval and ex post administrative sanctions by the Chinese Securities Regulatory Commission, and letters of concern issued by the stock exchanges. While the public regulators have strong expertise in reviewing RPTs, empirical evidence shows that these regulatory measures have not been frequently implemented, suggesting that their effects are likely limited due to the lack of public resources and information. Adopting regulatory strategies that enhance the capacity of regulators and improvement of internal governance mechanisms are thus necessary.
{"title":"The effectiveness of judicial and public enforcement of regulation on related-party transaction in China","authors":"James Si Zeng","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2022.2107075","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2022.2107075","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines how China, a developing country with relatively weak judicial capacity, regulates related-party transactions (RPTs). Although Chinese courts can block unfair RPTs that involve non-financial assets, they generally lack the capacity to evaluate the fairness of RPTs involving financial assets. In recent years, China has developed new regulatory strategies, including shareholder litigation brought by the Chinese Securities Investor Service Center, ex ante approval and ex post administrative sanctions by the Chinese Securities Regulatory Commission, and letters of concern issued by the stock exchanges. While the public regulators have strong expertise in reviewing RPTs, empirical evidence shows that these regulatory measures have not been frequently implemented, suggesting that their effects are likely limited due to the lack of public resources and information. Adopting regulatory strategies that enhance the capacity of regulators and improvement of internal governance mechanisms are thus necessary.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"505 - 534"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46727287","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14735970.2022.2093889
X. Zhang
ABSTRACT This article provides empirical evidence and policy analysis to investigate the rising caseloads of bankruptcy insolvency in China in recent years and the law's efficacy. It shows that creditors have more significant incentives to file for insolvency to invalidate possible fraudulent transactions, overcome limitations of judicial execution and hold relevant insiders accountable for the failure of liquidation. In addition, the state promoted bankruptcy to serve the Supply-Side Structural Reform and Cases about Transformation from Execution to Bankruptcy after 2015. Nonetheless, China's bankruptcy system failed the functions of eliminating inefficient firms and preserving insolvent assets. That people viewed bankruptcy as a last resort meant the lack of remaining distributable assets in bankruptcy enterprises, which might disenchant the perceived efficacy of bankruptcy in the long run. The effect of the liquidation duty was also limited because of legal ambiguities and the inability to prevent debtors from making unreasonable decisions.
{"title":"Why do people apply for bankruptcy insolvency in China: empirical evidence and policy analysis","authors":"X. Zhang","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2022.2093889","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2022.2093889","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article provides empirical evidence and policy analysis to investigate the rising caseloads of bankruptcy insolvency in China in recent years and the law's efficacy. It shows that creditors have more significant incentives to file for insolvency to invalidate possible fraudulent transactions, overcome limitations of judicial execution and hold relevant insiders accountable for the failure of liquidation. In addition, the state promoted bankruptcy to serve the Supply-Side Structural Reform and Cases about Transformation from Execution to Bankruptcy after 2015. Nonetheless, China's bankruptcy system failed the functions of eliminating inefficient firms and preserving insolvent assets. That people viewed bankruptcy as a last resort meant the lack of remaining distributable assets in bankruptcy enterprises, which might disenchant the perceived efficacy of bankruptcy in the long run. The effect of the liquidation duty was also limited because of legal ambiguities and the inability to prevent debtors from making unreasonable decisions.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"431 - 467"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46921026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14735970.2021.2012884
R. Huang, Charles C.Y. Wang, Olivia Xin Zhang
ABSTRACT In July 2019, Hong Kong issued a comprehensive regulation on robo-advisors in the capital markets, with a view to striking a balance between investor protection and innovation promotion. This regulation has generated some noticeable positive impact on the market, but some problems remain to be addressed. It is critically assessed by way of a comparison with the laws in the US, the UK, Singapore, and Mainland China. It has strengths in terms of regulatory form and approach, the comprehensiveness of guidance provided and clear allocation of responsibility. There are also several weaknesses and challenges. Firstly, greater efforts need to be made to ensure proper compliance and enforcement. Secondly, more attention should be paid to the increasing complexity of algorithms. Thirdly, the issue of outsourcing arrangements requires further thoughts. Finally, Hong Kong should consider a staged reform on its financial regulatory architecture to address the issue of regulatory arbitrage.
{"title":"The development and regulation of robo-advisors in Hong Kong: empirical and comparative perspectives","authors":"R. Huang, Charles C.Y. Wang, Olivia Xin Zhang","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2021.2012884","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2021.2012884","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In July 2019, Hong Kong issued a comprehensive regulation on robo-advisors in the capital markets, with a view to striking a balance between investor protection and innovation promotion. This regulation has generated some noticeable positive impact on the market, but some problems remain to be addressed. It is critically assessed by way of a comparison with the laws in the US, the UK, Singapore, and Mainland China. It has strengths in terms of regulatory form and approach, the comprehensiveness of guidance provided and clear allocation of responsibility. There are also several weaknesses and challenges. Firstly, greater efforts need to be made to ensure proper compliance and enforcement. Secondly, more attention should be paid to the increasing complexity of algorithms. Thirdly, the issue of outsourcing arrangements requires further thoughts. Finally, Hong Kong should consider a staged reform on its financial regulatory architecture to address the issue of regulatory arbitrage.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"229 - 263"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48992536","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14735970.2022.2093833
Ernest Lim, Umakanth Varottil
ABSTRACT The extensive literature on strategic climate litigation focuses mainly on lawsuits brought against private litigants or the state based on breaches of environmental law, tort law, human rights law or public law. Relatively far less has been written about corporate and securities litigation against companies or their directors, let alone in relation to Asia. This article fills these gaps. It critically examines whether and how the enforcement of corporate law and securities law can be used as a tool to address climate-related risks in three leading common law jurisdictions in Asia – India, Singapore, and Hong Kong. The central argument of this article is that because of the limitations of private and public enforcement of corporate law, public enforcement of securities law and listing rules is a more effective mechanism in addressing climate risks in the three jurisdictions.
{"title":"Climate risk: enforcement of corporate and securities law in common law Asia","authors":"Ernest Lim, Umakanth Varottil","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2022.2093833","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2022.2093833","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The extensive literature on strategic climate litigation focuses mainly on lawsuits brought against private litigants or the state based on breaches of environmental law, tort law, human rights law or public law. Relatively far less has been written about corporate and securities litigation against companies or their directors, let alone in relation to Asia. This article fills these gaps. It critically examines whether and how the enforcement of corporate law and securities law can be used as a tool to address climate-related risks in three leading common law jurisdictions in Asia – India, Singapore, and Hong Kong. The central argument of this article is that because of the limitations of private and public enforcement of corporate law, public enforcement of securities law and listing rules is a more effective mechanism in addressing climate risks in the three jurisdictions.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"391 - 430"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43741947","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14735970.2022.2043543
Natalie Mrockova
ABSTRACT The resolution of insolvency of small and medium-sized enterprises (‘SMEs’) has attracted much attention and criticism globally. Studies from around the world suggest that regular insolvency law fails to address the particular needs and challenges of SME financial distress. China has recently introduced simplified rules aimed at improving the resolution of insolvent SMEs. This article examines these rules and assesses how well they address the identified needs and challenges faced by insolvent SMEs. It considers how the examined rules differ from regular insolvency law and how they compare with the broader international best practice and guidance for SMEs. The discussion evaluates new solutions and tools that have been used in China, their effectiveness and impact both on paper and based on the outcomes in practice. The article concludes by identifying eight lessons for other jurisdictions which are trying to improve resolution of SME insolvencies.
{"title":"Resolving SME insolvencies: an analysis of new Chinese rules","authors":"Natalie Mrockova","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2022.2043543","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2022.2043543","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The resolution of insolvency of small and medium-sized enterprises (‘SMEs’) has attracted much attention and criticism globally. Studies from around the world suggest that regular insolvency law fails to address the particular needs and challenges of SME financial distress. China has recently introduced simplified rules aimed at improving the resolution of insolvent SMEs. This article examines these rules and assesses how well they address the identified needs and challenges faced by insolvent SMEs. It considers how the examined rules differ from regular insolvency law and how they compare with the broader international best practice and guidance for SMEs. The discussion evaluates new solutions and tools that have been used in China, their effectiveness and impact both on paper and based on the outcomes in practice. The article concludes by identifying eight lessons for other jurisdictions which are trying to improve resolution of SME insolvencies.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"469 - 503"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41896194","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-27DOI: 10.1080/14735970.2021.1977453
D. Zetzsche, Linn Anker-Sørensen, Roberta Consiglio, Miko Yeboah-Smith
ABSTRACT This article documents elements of COVID-19-inspired company legislation on digital participation of shareholders in general meetings in 22 countries and analyses to what extent such legislation can function as a blueprint for law reform. Lawmakers need to strike a balance between ensuring a smooth general meeting (from management's perspective) and protecting shareholders' rights. COVID-19 legislation with regard to shareholder interventions has lacked this balance. Further, crisis legislation, adopted in haste as it was, could not reflect the fundamental shift towards institutionalized shareholdings. Once adopted, there is a risk that the hasty choices made during COVID times will stick, resulting in suboptimal regulation of shareholder meetings. The crisis legislation on meetings should thus be revisited, reflecting three paradigm shifts in corporate governance, namely the form of the meeting (virtual instead of in-person), its temporal dimension (multi-day process instead of a specific meeting day), and the institutionalisation of ownership, which allows investors to deploy resources and technology unavailable to most individuals.
{"title":"Enhancing virtual governance: comparative lessons from COVID-19 company laws","authors":"D. Zetzsche, Linn Anker-Sørensen, Roberta Consiglio, Miko Yeboah-Smith","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2021.1977453","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2021.1977453","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article documents elements of COVID-19-inspired company legislation on digital participation of shareholders in general meetings in 22 countries and analyses to what extent such legislation can function as a blueprint for law reform. Lawmakers need to strike a balance between ensuring a smooth general meeting (from management's perspective) and protecting shareholders' rights. COVID-19 legislation with regard to shareholder interventions has lacked this balance. Further, crisis legislation, adopted in haste as it was, could not reflect the fundamental shift towards institutionalized shareholdings. Once adopted, there is a risk that the hasty choices made during COVID times will stick, resulting in suboptimal regulation of shareholder meetings. The crisis legislation on meetings should thus be revisited, reflecting three paradigm shifts in corporate governance, namely the form of the meeting (virtual instead of in-person), its temporal dimension (multi-day process instead of a specific meeting day), and the institutionalisation of ownership, which allows investors to deploy resources and technology unavailable to most individuals.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"115 - 150"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49154435","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：