The John M. Olin Center

Paper Abstract

Untitled Document

18. Pierre-Henri Conac, Luca Enriques and Martin Gelter, Constraining Dominant Shareholders' Self-Dealing, 7/2008.

Abstract: All jurisdictions supply corporations with legal tools to prevent or punish asset diversion by those, whether managers or dominant shareholders, who are in control. As previous research has shown, these rules, doctrines and remedies are far from uniform across jurisdictions, possibly leading to signifi cant differences in the degree of investor protection they provide. Comparative research in this fi eld is wrought with diffi culty. It is tempting to compare corporate laws by taking one benchmark jurisdiction, typically the US, and to assess the quality of other corporate law systems depending on how much they replicate some prominent features. We take a different perspective and describe how three major continental European countries (France, Germany, and Italy) regulate dominant shareholders’ self-dealing by looking at all the possible rules, doctrines and remedies available there. While the doctrines and remedies reviewed in this article are familiar enough to corporate lawyers and legal scholars from the respective countries, this is less true for many participants in the international discussion, which remains dominated by Anglophone legal scholars and economists. We suggest that some of these doctrines and remedies, namely the German prohibition against concealed distributions, the role of minority shareholders in the prosecution of abus de biens sociaux in France, and nullifi cation suits in all three countries and especially in Germany and Italy, have not received the attention they deserve.


18: PDF