法律作为市场标准:合同法与公司法的自愿统一

A. Engert
{"title":"法律作为市场标准:合同法与公司法的自愿统一","authors":"A. Engert","doi":"10.1017/9781108566391.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is a common perception that differences in private laws impede cross-border business activity. The goal of enhancing economic integration, both regionally and globally, often animates legislative advances towards harmonizing or unifying legal rules across jurisdictions. This chapter invokes the economic theory of standards competition or “network effects” as a framework to evaluate the promise of voluntary law unification. It highlights that standardization need not be the responsibility of lawmakers. With free choice of law, markets themselves produce their own degrees and patterns of standardization. The paper makes several predictions about the scope of market standardization in two particularly important areas, contract law and company law; it also adduces some empirical evidence. One policy implication is that international standardization does not depend on crafting uniform law. The laws of national jurisdictions can also be suitable as market standards for cross-border transactions. This adds a new perspective to the continuing debate about regulatory competition between jurisdictions: The winners of the race are decided as much by network effects as by differences in the substantive quality of their laws. Better law standardization can be a desirable outcome of jurisdictional competition. Andreas Engert Freie Universität Berlin, Department of Law Vant-Hoff-Straße 8 14195 Berlin, Germany e-mail: andreas.engert@fu-berlin.de","PeriodicalId":325679,"journal":{"name":"Convergence and Divergence of Private Law in Asia","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Law as a Market Standard: Voluntary Unification in Contract and Company Law\",\"authors\":\"A. Engert\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/9781108566391.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is a common perception that differences in private laws impede cross-border business activity. The goal of enhancing economic integration, both regionally and globally, often animates legislative advances towards harmonizing or unifying legal rules across jurisdictions. This chapter invokes the economic theory of standards competition or “network effects” as a framework to evaluate the promise of voluntary law unification. It highlights that standardization need not be the responsibility of lawmakers. With free choice of law, markets themselves produce their own degrees and patterns of standardization. The paper makes several predictions about the scope of market standardization in two particularly important areas, contract law and company law; it also adduces some empirical evidence. One policy implication is that international standardization does not depend on crafting uniform law. The laws of national jurisdictions can also be suitable as market standards for cross-border transactions. This adds a new perspective to the continuing debate about regulatory competition between jurisdictions: The winners of the race are decided as much by network effects as by differences in the substantive quality of their laws. Better law standardization can be a desirable outcome of jurisdictional competition. Andreas Engert Freie Universität Berlin, Department of Law Vant-Hoff-Straße 8 14195 Berlin, Germany e-mail: andreas.engert@fu-berlin.de\",\"PeriodicalId\":325679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Convergence and Divergence of Private Law in Asia\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Convergence and Divergence of Private Law in Asia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108566391.006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Convergence and Divergence of Private Law in Asia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108566391.006","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

人们普遍认为,私法的差异阻碍了跨境商业活动。加强区域和全球经济一体化的目标往往推动立法进程,以协调或统一各司法管辖区的法律规则。本章援引标准竞争或“网络效应”的经济理论作为评估自愿法律统一前景的框架。它强调,标准化不一定是立法者的责任。在法律的自由选择下,市场本身产生了自己的标准化程度和模式。本文对合同法和公司法这两个特别重要的领域的市场规范化范围作了几点预测;它还引用了一些经验证据。一个政策暗示是,国际标准化并不依赖于制定统一的法律。国家司法管辖区的法律也可以适合作为跨境交易的市场标准。这为有关司法管辖区之间监管竞争的持续辩论提供了一个新的视角:这场竞赛的赢家不仅取决于法律实质质量的差异,也取决于网络效应。更好的法律标准化可能是管辖权竞争的理想结果。Andreas Engert Freie Universität柏林,法学院vant - hoff - strae ße 8 14195柏林,德国,电子邮件:andreas.engert@fu-berlin.de
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Law as a Market Standard: Voluntary Unification in Contract and Company Law
It is a common perception that differences in private laws impede cross-border business activity. The goal of enhancing economic integration, both regionally and globally, often animates legislative advances towards harmonizing or unifying legal rules across jurisdictions. This chapter invokes the economic theory of standards competition or “network effects” as a framework to evaluate the promise of voluntary law unification. It highlights that standardization need not be the responsibility of lawmakers. With free choice of law, markets themselves produce their own degrees and patterns of standardization. The paper makes several predictions about the scope of market standardization in two particularly important areas, contract law and company law; it also adduces some empirical evidence. One policy implication is that international standardization does not depend on crafting uniform law. The laws of national jurisdictions can also be suitable as market standards for cross-border transactions. This adds a new perspective to the continuing debate about regulatory competition between jurisdictions: The winners of the race are decided as much by network effects as by differences in the substantive quality of their laws. Better law standardization can be a desirable outcome of jurisdictional competition. Andreas Engert Freie Universität Berlin, Department of Law Vant-Hoff-Straße 8 14195 Berlin, Germany e-mail: andreas.engert@fu-berlin.de
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
期刊最新文献
The Presumption of Regularity in Chinese Corporate Contracting: Evidence and the Prospect of Regional Convergence How Asian Should Asian Law Be? The New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration: Existing Models for Legal Convergence in Asia? Law as a Market Standard: Voluntary Unification in Contract and Company Law Uniform Law and the Production and Circulation of Legal Models
×
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