股东检查权:来自澳大利亚的经验教训

IF 1.2 4区 社会学 Q1 LAW Journal of Corporate Law Studies Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/14735970.2022.2054166
Timothy Bowley, Jennifer G. Hill
{"title":"股东检查权:来自澳大利亚的经验教训","authors":"Timothy Bowley, Jennifer G. Hill","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2022.2054166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n Information asymmetry between shareholders and corporate managers can subvert contemporary calls for increased institutional investor oversight. Information asymmetry can also arise between minority shareholders and controlling shareholders. This article examines the trajectory of shareholder inspection rights in Australia. It evaluates the effectiveness of an important shift in the 1980s from the narrow and prescriptive U.K. common law inspection right to a statutory regime, which confers broad discretion on the courts to decide whether inspection is appropriate. The article also explores the tension between inspection rights (which provide individual shareholders with access to non-public company information) and modern securities laws which promote market integrity by preventing selective disclosure of material information by listed entities. The Australian experience provides international law makers and researchers with important insights into the efficacy and implications of different models of regulating shareholder inspection rights.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"335 - 364"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shareholder inspection rights: lessons from Australia\",\"authors\":\"Timothy Bowley, Jennifer G. Hill\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14735970.2022.2054166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT\\n Information asymmetry between shareholders and corporate managers can subvert contemporary calls for increased institutional investor oversight. Information asymmetry can also arise between minority shareholders and controlling shareholders. This article examines the trajectory of shareholder inspection rights in Australia. It evaluates the effectiveness of an important shift in the 1980s from the narrow and prescriptive U.K. common law inspection right to a statutory regime, which confers broad discretion on the courts to decide whether inspection is appropriate. The article also explores the tension between inspection rights (which provide individual shareholders with access to non-public company information) and modern securities laws which promote market integrity by preventing selective disclosure of material information by listed entities. The Australian experience provides international law makers and researchers with important insights into the efficacy and implications of different models of regulating shareholder inspection rights.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Corporate Law Studies\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"335 - 364\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Corporate Law Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2022.2054166\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2022.2054166","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

股东和公司管理者之间的信息不对称可能会颠覆当前要求加强机构投资者监督的呼声。小股东和控股股东之间也可能出现信息不对称。本文考察了澳大利亚股东检查权的发展轨迹。它评估了20世纪80年代英国从狭隘的、说明性的普通法检查权到法定制度的重要转变的有效性,后者赋予法院广泛的自由裁量权来决定检查是否适当。本文还探讨了检查权(为个人股东提供获取非上市公司信息的权利)与现代证券法(通过防止上市实体选择性披露重大信息来促进市场诚信)之间的紧张关系。澳大利亚的经验为国际法律制定者和研究人员提供了重要的见解,以了解不同的股东检查权监管模式的效力和影响。
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
Shareholder inspection rights: lessons from Australia
ABSTRACT Information asymmetry between shareholders and corporate managers can subvert contemporary calls for increased institutional investor oversight. Information asymmetry can also arise between minority shareholders and controlling shareholders. This article examines the trajectory of shareholder inspection rights in Australia. It evaluates the effectiveness of an important shift in the 1980s from the narrow and prescriptive U.K. common law inspection right to a statutory regime, which confers broad discretion on the courts to decide whether inspection is appropriate. The article also explores the tension between inspection rights (which provide individual shareholders with access to non-public company information) and modern securities laws which promote market integrity by preventing selective disclosure of material information by listed entities. The Australian experience provides international law makers and researchers with important insights into the efficacy and implications of different models of regulating shareholder inspection rights.
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
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
18
期刊最新文献
The extension of vicarious liability in corporate groups Investor personhood: the case against paternalism and welfarism in corporate law Separate legal personality – an explanation and a defence Directors’ positive duty to act in the interests of the entity: shareholders’ interests bounded by corporate purpose Private credit: a renaissance in corporate finance
×
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