A Theory of Shareholder Activism and its Place in Corporate Law

Author(s):  
Bernard S. Sharfman
2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulya Yasmine Prisandani

Purpose This paper aims to elaborate on the extent to which the Indonesian legal framework has provided room for shareholder activism and the extent to which shareholder activism has been implemented in Indonesia. Design/methodology/approach This study combines normative and empirical legal research methods. Indonesian laws and regulations are analyzed aside from the analysis of empirical data and court decisions on shareholder activism implementation. Findings Indonesian laws and regulations have accommodated shareholders’ activism and shareholders have started to rectify mismanagement and abuse of power that causes loss to the company through derivative lawsuits. Despite this, Indonesian shareholders are still passive, shown by the number of questions asked in the general meetings of shareholders despite the high attendance percentage. Shareholders have also formed associations to gather more influence on the company’s decision-making process. Research limitations/implications The empirical observation in this study was limited to LQ45 companies of the February to July 2021 period. This study can be useful to improve corporate governance and corporate communication in a company to encourage higher participation of individual/minority shareholders. This study also serves as an extension to numerous studies on shareholder protection, corporate governance and corporate law in Indonesia. Originality/value Study on shareholder activism in Indonesia is still rare, despite the rising urgency of company supervision and monitoring to prevent mismanagement. To fill in that gap, this research hopes to initiate discussion on shareholder activism in relation to shareholder protection, corporate governance and corporate law implementation.


Author(s):  
Anita Indira Anand

This chapter examines shareholder-driven corporate governance (SCG) through the twin concepts of shareholder democracy and shareholder activism. Taken together, these concepts are the vehicle through which SCG takes effect in practice. The term activist investor describes an institutional investor that seeks value-enhancing changes in the leadership, governance, capital structure, or strategy and operations of a corporation in which it is invested. There are two basic types of activism: offensive activism, in which a hedge fund takes over a poorly performing firm and then reforms it to enhance its performance; and defensive activism, in which the activist institution takes on an advocacy role when it is unhappy with a corporation of which it already holds a significant block. Meanwhile, shareholder democracy refers to the ability of shareholders to influence the corporation through their votes. It is an important concept in corporate law, one that underpins the legitimacy of shareholder activism.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Bottomley ◽  
Kath Hall ◽  
Peta Spender ◽  
Beth Nosworthy
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-179
Author(s):  
Alessandro Suppa ◽  
Pavel Bureš

SummaryNowadays, an important role in the world is played by Multinational Corporations (MNCs). They hire, produce, and influence the international economy, but also, they exploit, pollute. Their business activities might have a worldwide effect on human lives. The question of the responsibility of MNCs has drawn the attention of many scholars, mainly from the study field labelled “Business and Human Rights”. The present paper does not examine the topic under the same approach. The authors aim at presenting the issue in a broader perspective, exploring the concept of due diligence both in international and corporate law. In this paper, authors strategically use the uniformity of national legislations as a possible and alternative solution to the issue. They are aware of three fundamental factors: 1) the definition of MNCs needs to be as clear as possible, so to avoid any degree of uncertainty; 2) the outsourcing phenomenon interacts with that definition; 3) in case of no possibility to include outsourcing in the definition of MNC, the original question arises in a significant way.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-104
Author(s):  
Insa Koch

Does anthropology matter to law? At first sight, this question might seem redundant: of course, anthropology matters to law, and it does so a great deal. Anthropologists have made important contributions to legal debates. Legal anthropology is a thriving sub-discipline, encompassing an ever-increasing range of topics, from long-standing concerns with customary law and legal culture to areas that have historically been left to lawyers, including corporate law and financial regulation. Anthropology’s relevance to law is also reflected in the world of legal practice. Some anthropologists act as cultural experts in, while others have challenged the workings of, particular legal regimes, including with respect to immigration law and social welfare.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document