scholarly journals Perspectives and obstacles of the shareholder activism implementation: A comparative analysis of civil and common law systems

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 520-533 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khurram Parvez Raja ◽  
Alex Kostyuk
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Stock Market ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Shareholder Activism ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Uk

The paper outlines shareholder activism development in common law and civil law countries and identifies features of these legal systems that create preconditions and obstacles for shareholder activism. Our findings show that tendencies of shareholder activism depend on the type of the legal system, but also vary within the countries that share the same legal system. Thus, we conclude that the type of legal system is not the chief determinant of shareholder activism. A comparative analysis of shareholder activism in Germany and Ukraine (civil law countries) and the USA and the UK (common law countries) shows that the system of domestic corporate regulation, development of the stock market, companies’ capitalization and corporate governance influence the development of shareholder activism in equal measure.

scholarly journals Dimensions of precedent: a methodology to understand the doctrine of precedent

Perspectivas ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-107
Author(s):  
Florencia S. Ratti Mendaña ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Adequate Understanding

This article evidences multiple ways in which judicial precedent is used in different legal systems. It shows that: a) precedent is currently used, one way or another, in every legal system but its use differs in each legal system and frequently it is used differently even between courts of the same legal system; b) a comparative analysis under the methodology hereby proposed would provide useful tools in order to address how to “treat like cases alike”. The main aim of this research is to set the conceptual framework for an adequate understanding and study of the doctrine of precedent. To do this, some dimensions of the doctrine of precedent will be added to those enumerated by Michele Taruffo and analyzed not only theoretically, but also under concrete examples of how they work in different legal systems —both of common law and civil law.

scholarly journals The Transplant of Trusts in Different Legal Jurisdictions: The Example of China

Global Jurist ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Giulia Terranova
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Original Model ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
Legal Institution ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Trust Law

AbstractLegal transplants are considered a significant factor in the evolution of legal systems. One example of transplant of a legal institution through its prestige is the diffusion of the trust from the English legal system to other common law systems and to many civil law countries. One of these is China that in 2001 enacted the Trust Law of the People’s Republic of China. This paper wants to analyse the trust under the Trust Law and to compare it with the original model in the English legal system, understanding how far or how close it is from the original one.

scholarly journals Effect of the legal system country of European commercial banks on the financial distress

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 168
Author(s):  
Nizar Baklouti ◽  
Frédéric Gautier ◽  
François Aubert
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Financial Distress ◽  
Commercial Banks ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Financial Health ◽  
The Relationship

This study examines the effect of the legal system on the governance of banks and hence on financial distress. We compare corporate governance to the legal system in 18 countries of the European Union to explain the relationship between financial distress and bank governance. Using a sample of 147 commercial banks, we find that the effect of the legal system really counts. The results also suggest that banks operating in common law and civil law countries tend the concentration of ownership and board size to the effect of increasing the likelihood of financial distress. This study contributes to research in the governance of enterprise to provide empirical evidence that the legal system has the power to influence the financial health of banks.

scholarly journals Transfer of Risk of Loss in Turkish Law and International Treaties

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Almıla Özkan ◽  
Ayşe Sena Aksakallı
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Law System ◽  
Common Law System ◽  
The Way

The risk of loss refers to the value of the goods that were damaged or destroyed without responsibilities of any party. While the matter of risk of loss differs from legal systems to legal systems, it has been subject to international treaties as well. In Turkish legal system, the abrogated Code of Obligation and Turkish Code of Obligations have different features in terms of transfer of risk of loss. According to abrogated Code of Obligation, the buyer is responsible for the value of the damaged goods as soon as the parties sign the contract. In Turkish Code of Obligations, the seller bears the risk of loss until the delivery of goods or registration. Turkish Code of Obligation is compatible with civil law. And abrogated Code of Obligation is compatible with common law system. There are rules regarding transfer of risk of loss in many international treaties. By the way, it must be stated that rules of transfer of risk of loss in Vienna Convention are compatible with Turkish Code of Obligations.

Investor protection and market liquidity revisited

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 517-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaofeng Shi ◽  
Michael Dempsey ◽  
Huu Nhan Duong ◽  
Petko S. Kalev
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Hong Kong ◽  
Stock Market ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Investor Protection ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Market Liquidity ◽  
Stock Liquidity ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – This paper aims to establish the relation between corporate governance – as represented by investor protection at both the legal and firm levels – and stock market liquidity. Design/methodology/approach – This paper avails of the unique features of Hong Kong- and China-based stocks that are traded on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange so as to test whether differences between “common law” and “civil law” legal environments contribute to differences in stock liquidity. In addition, by constructing an internal corporate governance index score for each firm based on board size, board independence and information on the audit and remuneration committee, we document whether firms with better corporate governance scores have narrower spreads, greater depth and higher trading volumes. Findings – Overall, results provide support for a linkage between corporate governance issues – as investor rights protection at both the environment and firm protection levels – and stock market liquidity. Research limitations/implications – This paper recognizes that investor protection constitutes a single component of the desirability of investing in a firm’s stock. Nevertheless, it does appear to constitute an important component of a stock’s attractiveness. Practical implications – The practical implications are clear, namely, that good corporate governance of firms leads to their attractiveness as investment vehicles (for both the shorter and the longer terms). Social implications – The paper has clear social implications. In particular, the paper serves to highlight that prospects for enduring wealth creation are contingent on the safeguards accorded to the equity ownership of a firm’s stock. Originality/value – The originality lies in taking advantage of the unique features of the Chinese and Hong Kong firms on the Hong Kong Exchange, so as to examine the contrasting influences of common law and civil law on stock liquidity. Thus, the authors allow for the effects of corporate governance across the two legal environments (China and Hong Kong) to be compared and contrasted while maintaining other influences unchanged across Chinese and Hong Kong shares.

Legal protection systems, corporate governance and firm performance: a cross-country comparison

2022 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yosra Ghabri
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Firm Performance ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Institutional Environment ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Investor Protection ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Valuation Effect

Purpose This paper builds on the “Law and Finance” theory and aims to examine the effect of the legal and institutional environment on the governance–performance relationship in the context of non-US firms. More precisely, it examines whether and how the country’s legal system and the level of investor protection interact with the firm-level corporate governance and affect firm performance. Design/methodology/approach The authors used the “G-Index” governance score developed by the Governance Metrics International rating for a sample of 12,728 firm-year observations from 23 countries over the 2009–2016 period. Findings The results show that the interaction between the country-level institutions and corporate governance system significantly affect the firm performance. In particular, the findings indicate that firms operating in common law countries tend to exhibit a positive valuation effect and higher performance than firms with a comparable corporate governance level operating in civil law countries. More precisely, the authors find that in common law countries, higher investor protection with enhanced corporate governance is associated with better firm performance. However, firms operating in civil law countries with weaker investor protection and a comparable corporate governance level tend to experience a negative valuation effect. Originality/value The findings suggest that the institutional and legal environment is crucial and important in determining the value-maximizing level of good governance practices. Managers and regulators should carefully analyze the cost of these initiatives and should coordinate it with the needs of the country’s legal system. The challenge for the company will be how to adjust its corporate governance strategy according to the needs and demands of the country’s legal system in which the company operates to improve its performance. The regulators should ensure a fit between the specifics of the national legal and institutional environment and corporate governance standards and practices.

Judicial Oversight of Procedural Fairness and Propriety in Europe: Diversity Within Commonality

2021 ◽  
pp. 339-366
Author(s):  
Giacinto della Cananea
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Common Core ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Procedural Fairness ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
The Common ◽  
Initial Focus

This chapter explores the common and distinctive elements that emerge from the comparative analysis of legal systems, in terms of commonality and diversity in administrative law. It begins by outlining the main institutional features of the legal systems selected for the comparison, with an initial focus on the idea of a 'divide' between civil law and common law. The two important features of the legal systems examined in this book include judicial independence and judicial specialization. The chapter then discusses the procedural requirements at the heart of the factual analysis. It concludes by reflecting on the relevance and significance of this analysis for the general enquiry concerning the common core of European administrative laws.

scholarly journals Shareholders rights and remedies (comparative law perspective)

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 6-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuliya Lapina ◽  
Alexander Kostyuk ◽  
Udo Braendle ◽  
Yaroslav Mozghovyi
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Stock Market ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Shareholder Protection ◽  
Efficient Mechanisms

The main aim is to discuss shareholder rights protection in Ukraine and Germany, which have the same Civil law legal system. Our contribution outlines, systemizes and accesses approaches how critical and weak issues in the area of shareholder protection are resolved in both countries using the mechanisms of corporate governance. Using Germany as a benchmark, the paper identifies that the most important and efficient mechanisms of shareholders rights protection, which can be implemented in Ukrainian companies are the following: principle of equal treatment and duty of loyalty which should be fixed in the legislation; enhancing the role of the National Securities and Stock Market Commission; introduction of the derivative suit system.

scholarly journals Attribution of Liability among Multiple Tortfeasors under Negligence Law: Causation in Iran and England

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 219
Author(s):  
Elyas Noee ◽  
Mohammad Noee ◽  
Azadeh Mehrpouyan
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Tort Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Law System ◽  
Common Law System ◽  
Negligence Law ◽  
Civil Law System

“Causation” possesses a considerable place in tort law of Iran and England particularly in the field of Negligence law. Existing differences in legal systems of Iran (as a Civil Law system) and England (as a Common Law system) make find a common perspective difficult to study causation but possible. This research focuses to compare causation in cases where more than one tortfeasors is involved in inflicting damage by negligence. This study also attempts to recognize differences and similarities between Iran and England in order to resolve ambiguities in Iran legal system through England legal system. The study was conducted in three sections including tortfeasors’ indenpendancy, tortfeasors’ contribution, and tortfeasors’ separate impact. This paper reports respectively: in case of tortfeasor independency, Iran law admits jointly and severally liability while England law offers a variety of approaches in various cases; in case of tortfeasors’ contribution, each tortfeasor is liable according to its effect on causing damage with few exceptions; and in case of tortfeasors’ separate impact, per tortfeasor is liable for inflicted damage which is only from oneself side. The results show England law can be considered to filling legal gap of Iran law regarding present identified differences and similarities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document