Cross-border mergers and minority protection<br> An open-ended harmonization

Minority protection is an important, though difficult, issue in company law, and a subtle balance must be struck between the legitimate interests of the majority and minority shareholder(s). The rules on minority protection in the context of the Cross-border Mergers Directive, which was recently ado...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marieke Wyckaert, Koen Geens
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Utrecht University School of Law 2008-03-01
Series:Utrecht Law Review
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.utrechtlawreview.org/articles/10.18352/ulr.60/
id doaj-07acca6b0d434927b6151927b25cc279
record_format Article
spelling doaj-07acca6b0d434927b6151927b25cc2792020-11-25T02:36:41ZengUtrecht University School of LawUtrecht Law Review1871-515X2008-03-0141405210.18352/ulr.6060Cross-border mergers and minority protection<br> An open-ended harmonizationMarieke WyckaertKoen GeensMinority protection is an important, though difficult, issue in company law, and a subtle balance must be struck between the legitimate interests of the majority and minority shareholder(s). The rules on minority protection in the context of the Cross-border Mergers Directive, which was recently adopted and should have been transposed into Member States’ national law towards the end of 2007, are examined in this paper. The authors analyse how minority shareholders are protected within the scope of this Directive and how some of the Member States (such as Germany, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands) have transposed or will transpose some of these protective provisions. The different levels of minority protection (information rights, consultation rights, rights to challenge majority decisions and other specific rights) are considered, as well as which types of shareholders can benefit from such protection, and why they should be afforded protection. With respect to the last question, the authors conclude that the change in corporate law encountered especially by the shareholders of the disappearing company seems to be the major rationale underlying the European legislator's decision to introduce minority protection (but not oblige Member States to do so). The authors submit that this reflects too narrow a vision on the need for minority protection because it ignores the fact that the change of the corporate form as a consequence of a merger is in itself sufficient rationale for protecting minority shareholders. It remains somewhat of a mystery as to why the European legislator, while confirming that a cross-border merger should be subject to the same rules as a national merger, has created one possible and very vague exception to that rule.http://www.utrechtlawreview.org/articles/10.18352/ulr.60/minority shareholderscross-border mergerstenth directiveEU company law
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Marieke Wyckaert
Koen Geens
spellingShingle Marieke Wyckaert
Koen Geens
Cross-border mergers and minority protection<br> An open-ended harmonization
Utrecht Law Review
minority shareholders
cross-border mergers
tenth directive
EU company law
author_facet Marieke Wyckaert
Koen Geens
author_sort Marieke Wyckaert
title Cross-border mergers and minority protection<br> An open-ended harmonization
title_short Cross-border mergers and minority protection<br> An open-ended harmonization
title_full Cross-border mergers and minority protection<br> An open-ended harmonization
title_fullStr Cross-border mergers and minority protection<br> An open-ended harmonization
title_full_unstemmed Cross-border mergers and minority protection<br> An open-ended harmonization
title_sort cross-border mergers and minority protection<br> an open-ended harmonization
publisher Utrecht University School of Law
series Utrecht Law Review
issn 1871-515X
publishDate 2008-03-01
description Minority protection is an important, though difficult, issue in company law, and a subtle balance must be struck between the legitimate interests of the majority and minority shareholder(s). The rules on minority protection in the context of the Cross-border Mergers Directive, which was recently adopted and should have been transposed into Member States’ national law towards the end of 2007, are examined in this paper. The authors analyse how minority shareholders are protected within the scope of this Directive and how some of the Member States (such as Germany, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands) have transposed or will transpose some of these protective provisions. The different levels of minority protection (information rights, consultation rights, rights to challenge majority decisions and other specific rights) are considered, as well as which types of shareholders can benefit from such protection, and why they should be afforded protection. With respect to the last question, the authors conclude that the change in corporate law encountered especially by the shareholders of the disappearing company seems to be the major rationale underlying the European legislator's decision to introduce minority protection (but not oblige Member States to do so). The authors submit that this reflects too narrow a vision on the need for minority protection because it ignores the fact that the change of the corporate form as a consequence of a merger is in itself sufficient rationale for protecting minority shareholders. It remains somewhat of a mystery as to why the European legislator, while confirming that a cross-border merger should be subject to the same rules as a national merger, has created one possible and very vague exception to that rule.
topic minority shareholders
cross-border mergers
tenth directive
EU company law
url http://www.utrechtlawreview.org/articles/10.18352/ulr.60/
work_keys_str_mv AT mariekewyckaert crossbordermergersandminorityprotectionltbrgtanopenendedharmonization
AT koengeens crossbordermergersandminorityprotectionltbrgtanopenendedharmonization
_version_ 1724798621665198080