scholarly journals Legal Origins and the Financial Conservatism of Private Firms

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 103
Author(s):  
Hongzhong Fan ◽  
Mirza Nouman Ali Talib ◽  
Pan Chen
Keyword(s):  
Financial Crises ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Private Firms ◽  
Law And Finance ◽  
Minority Shareholders ◽  
Legal Origins ◽  
Tax Shields ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Financial Conservatism

Following the literature of corporate law and finance, our study emphasizes on differences of legal origins and their laws influencing the capital structures of the private firms following suboptimal conservative policies. The countries considered in each legal origin represents common law countries (UK, Australia, India, Pakistan and Thailand) and Roman backed civil law countries (Japan, South Korea, Germany) respectively. The time series considered for the study is 2000-2017. The findings provide that the conservative private firms are smaller in size with less investments but are positively related with profitability in both legal origins. However, the dividend payouts and non-debt tax shields have significant positive relation with conservative policies in civil law countries. It shows that the presence of minority shareholders’ protection law in civil law countries directs the firms to pay more dividends which may also help them in reducing agency costs. We further exhibit that, before financial crises of 2008, the conservative firms in both legal origins are less directed towards dividends, especially in common law countries. Nevertheless, private conservative firms of civil law countries are more inclined towards dividend payouts after financial crises. The study implicates that the difference of laws in legal origins affect the capital structures of the conservative private firms. It further provides that because of the less effective credit markets, private firms may also be forced to adopt conservative policies in civil law countries but may also have less agency problems due to high probability of having dividend payouts.

6. The significance of nation states

2017 ◽  
pp. 66-80
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Fisher
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Culture ◽  
Environmental Problems ◽  
Physical Reality ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Political Communities

Environmental problems transcend the boundaries of nation states. That fact is a reminder of the physical reality of such problems, but—for good or ill—political and legal imagination is the product of political communities that cluster into nation states. ‘The significance of nation states’ looks at how environmental law is shaped by the legal culture of nation states. It also discusses the difference between civil law systems and common law systems. The internal constitutional arrangements of a country are fundamental to how environmental law develops in a particular legal culture. Is a ‘global environmental law’ emerging?

scholarly journals The barratry of the shipmaster in early modern law: the approach of Italian and English law courts

2019 ◽  
Vol 87 (4) ◽  
pp. 504-574
Author(s):  
Guido Rossi
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Practical Importance ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Walk Away ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Law Courts ◽  
The Difference

SummaryFor a long time, the concept of barratry (at least in its maritime meaning) was one and the same on both sides of the Channel. The barratry of the shipmaster was part of the mercantile usages, and it identified the intentionally blameworthy conduct of the master. When law courts began to decide on insurance litigation they were confronted with a notion quite alien to them. Broadly speaking, the shipmaster’s barratry could well be considered a fraud of sort. But in order to decide on its occurrence in a specific case, law courts had to analyse it in legal terms, and so according to the specific legal categories of their own system. The point ceases to be trivially obvious if we think that the different legal framework of civil and common law courts progressively led to very different interpretations of the same thing. Thus, with the shift of insurance litigation from mercantile justice to law courts maritime barratry began to acquire increasingly different features in the two legal systems. Very often, the very same conduct of the shipmaster was considered as negligent by civil law courts and barratrous by common law courts. The difference was of great practical importance, for many policies excluded barratry from the risks insured against. So, depending on the kind of law court, an insurer could be charged with full liability for the mishap or walk away without paying anything. If the beginning of the story was the same, its end could not have been more different.

Sind Finanzmärkte in “Common-law-Ländern” besser entwickelt als in “Civil-law-Ländern”?

2007 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Uwe Vollmer
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Financial Markets ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Financial Development ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Institutional Development ◽  
Law And Finance ◽  
Geography Of Religion

AbstractThough the idea that formal institutions of corporate governance matter for economic development is widely accepted, it is still a matter of debate why different systems of corporate governance are dominant in different countries. While the “law-and-finance-view” asserts that the country′s affiliation to a certain legal family matters, other authors instead either emphasize the importance of geography, of religion and culture or of the dominance of interest groups for the institutional development of financial markets. This article surveys different views about the causes of financial development and presents empirical evidence on the question whether financial markets are really better developed in “common-lawcountries” than in “civil-law-countries”.

scholarly journals The comparative economics of financial access in gender economic inclusion

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Simplice Asongu ◽  
Rexon Nting
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Political Stability ◽  
Financial Access ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Legal Origins ◽  
Gender Inclusion

PurposeThe study has investigated the comparative importance of financial access in promoting gender inclusion in African countries.Design/methodology/approachGender inclusion is proxied by the female labour participation rate while financial channels include: financial system deposits and private domestic credit. The empirical evidence is based on non-contemporary fixed effects regressions.FindingsIn order to provide more implications on comparative relevance, the dataset is categorised into income levels (middle income versus (vs.) low income); legal origins (French civil law vs. English common law); religious domination (Islam vs. Christianity); openness to sea (coastal vs. landlocked); resource-wealth (oil-poor vs. oil-rich) and political stability (stable vs. unstable). Six main hypotheses are tested, notably, that middle income, English common law, Christianity, coastal, oil-rich and stable countries enjoy better levels of “financial access”-induced gender inclusion compared to respectively, low income, French civil law, Islam, landlocked, oil-poor and unstable countries. All six tested hypotheses are validated.Originality/valueThis is the first study on the comparative importance of financial access in gender economic participation.

scholarly journals Dividend Smoothing and Investor Protection

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-70
Author(s):  
Ante Džidić ◽  
Silvije Orsag
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Investor Protection ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Legal Origin ◽  
Agency Model ◽  
Dividend Smoothing ◽  
Widespread Phenomenon ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Difference

Abstract This paper examines the agency model of dividends where the importance of dividends depends on the level of investor protection. The importance of dividends is presented by the dividend smoothing concept, while the level of investor protection is determined by the legal origin. Within this, the sensitivity of dividends to earnings changes was analyzed to examine the universality of the dividend smoothing phenomenon. Subsequently, the difference in proportions of dividend smoothing firms within the common law and civil law countries was tested to determine which of these two systems attributes more importance to dividends. Finally, the application of Lintner’s model was examined in transition countries as well as in United States. Research results show that dividend smoothing is a globally widespread phenomenon, but the likelihood to reduce or cut dividends is greater in civil law countries. Also, the largest percentage of dividend smoothing firms was recorded in common law countries.

scholarly journals Application of the Principles of Business Judgment in the Authoritative Function of Directors of Limited Liability Company in Singaporean and Indonesian Legal Perspectives

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 93
Author(s):  
Daniel Hendrawan ◽  
Emilia Fitriana Dewi ◽  
Subiakto Sukarno ◽  
Isti Raafaldini Mirzanti
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
The Difference

The purpose of this study is to analyze the functions and authority of the director of limited liability company in applying business judgment principles, by taking comparative law studies in Singapore's common law and in Indonesia's civil law. By taking emphasis on the authority of directors in representing limited companies both in and out, there are several authorities that are regulated in it. This study was conducted with a comparative law approach, with descriptive qualitative analysis. The results showed that sometimes directors act outside their authority and can harm a limited liability company. On the other hand, that there are actions of the board of directors that are in accordance with their authority but still harm the limited liability company. In this case, the shareholders often hold accountable. In corporate law there is a principle of business judgment where a director cannot be held accountable if the directors are proven to have good faith. The difference between Singapore law and Indonesian law in regulating the authority of directors is the good faith assessment held by directors.

scholarly journals THE ISSUE OF VARIANCE IN TRANSLATION OF TERMS IN THE FIELD OF CRIMINALISTICS AND FORENSIC EXAMINATION

2021 ◽  
pp. 200-215
Author(s):  
T. Kryvak
Keyword(s):  
Beneficial Effect ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Professional Communication ◽  
Law System ◽  
Forensic Examination ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Civil Law System

The article deals with the features of translation of terms in the field of criminalistics and forensic examination and the issue of variance that arises in the process of translation. It is noted that variance in the translation of terms in the field of criminalistics and forensic examination is both a positive and a negative phenomenon. However, the emergence of variance, as practice shows, is a prerequisite for the acquisition of an exact and unambiguous equivalent in language, depending on the context. The article indicates that the translation of terminology in the field of criminalistics is of particular interest, since the language of law, as a language of professional communication, has a vivid national specificity, due to the legal realities of national legal systems. Therefore, in the case of translations from English into Ukrainian and from Ukrainian into English, one should take into account the difference between the common law system, which is applied in English-speaking countries, and the civil law system, which also includes the Ukrainian legal system. The lexical transformations that are used when translating terms are analyzed and the need to achieve the effect of meaningful and contextual identity when translating terms is determined. It is concluded that as criminalistics and forensic examination develop, there is a rethinking and transformation of existing terminological units. Moreover, international cooperation has a beneficial effect on the work of not only terminologists, but also criminologists and forensic experts, since the unification of terminology facilitates communication between specialists. Terminology serves as the basic conceptual apparatus for any field of knowledge, and forensic science is no exception.

Subject vs. Object

2019 ◽  
pp. 79-102
Author(s):  
George P. Fletcher
Keyword(s):  
Human Subjects ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Ideal Types ◽  
Subject And Object ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Substantive Law

This chapter determines the difference between subject and object. The distinction between subject and object pervades the substantive law of war and, in general, the distinction between common law and civil law modes of criminal procedure and their relative influences on the procedures of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Criminal trials presuppose human subjects, agency, and judgment. The players in every trial take on different functions in common law and civil law trials. The notion of the accused’s guilt or innocence as an object of investigation takes on a stronger significance in civilian trials. The chapter then explores the ideal types of common law and civil law criminal procedure: one stressing the subjects as the determinative element and the other emphasizing the object of investigation.

scholarly journals PERLINDUNGAN HAK PATEN (Studi Komparatif Lingkup Perlindungan di Berbagai Negara)

FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 697
Author(s):  
Sutarman Yodo
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Patent Owner ◽  
Law System ◽  
United State ◽  
The Difference

AbstractThe differences of the legal system that patent scope protection in various countries, not only importing for new investment but determine the process of transfers of the technology of a state. Widespread protection cause transfers of technology become not easy eventhought less protection cause patent owner quit being lost. Both difference intention results in the need of comparative study on protection scope of the patent in countries. There are two problems should be explored, first what is the difference and similarity scope patent protection in the state's regulation and the second how legal system influenced to the differ occurrence? These problems used research methods that are statute approach and comparative approach, case approach, and conceptual approach. Result research found patent protection in Europe countries, United State, Japan, and Indonesia had similarity in protection requirement regulated such novelty, inventive step, and industrial applied. However, United State protection base on first to invent meanwhile other state based on first to file. Then scope of patent protection there has Germany applied the widest protection, then United State, and Japan, then Netherland. Mean England as the limited protection country. The difference patent protection is influenced by the legal system such common law that more referred to the precedent than civil law system with its codification. Germany is the only one country applied rigid codification on patent protection. Means, Indonesia formulated the of patent protection that is still limited related to the limited cases resolved in court. Keywords: Patent Right, Scope Protection, Comparative Law.AbstrakPerbedaan sistem hukum perlindungan lingkup paten di berbagai negara, tidak hanya mengimpor investasi baru namun juga menentukan proses transfer teknologi suatu negara. Perlindungan yang meluas menyebabkan transfer teknologi menjadi tidak mudah walaupun kurangnya perlindungan karena pemilik paten mengalami kerugian. Kedua perbedaan niat tersebut menghasilkan perlunya studi komparatif tentang cakupan perlindungan paten di negara-negara. Ada dua masalah yang harus dijajaki, pertama apa perbedaan dan kesamaan cakupan perlindungan paten dalam peraturan negara dan yang kedua bagaimana sistem hukum mempengaruhi kejadian yang berbeda? Masalah ini akan menggunakan metode penelitian pendekatan statuta menyeluruh dan pendekatan komparatif, pendekatan kasus, dan pendekatan konseptual. Hasil penelitian menemukan perlindungan paten di negara-negara Eropa, Amerika Serikat, Jepang, dan Indonesia memiliki kesamaan dalam persyaratan proteksi yang mengatur hal baru, langkah inventif, dan penerapan industri. Namun, perlindungan di Amerika Serikat pada awalnya untuk menciptakan sementara basis negara lain berdasarkan berkas pertama. Kemudian ruang lingkup proteksi paten di sana telah ada Jerman menerapkan proteksi terluas, kemudian Amerika Serikat, dan Jepang, lalu Belanda. Berarti Inggris sebagai negara perlindungan terbatas. Perbedaan proteksi paten dipengaruhi oleh sistem hukum common law yang lebih mengacu pada precedent daripada civil law dengan kodifikasinya. Jerman adalah satu-satunya negara yang menerapkan kodifikasi yang kaku terhadap perlindungan paten. Berarti, Indonesia merumuskan cakupan proteksi paten yang masih terbatas yang terkait dengan terbatasnya kasus yang diselesaikan di pengadilan. Kata kunci: Hak Paten, Perlindungan Ruang Lingkup, Hukum Komparatif

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document