Suchergebnisse

This work addresses the impact of language diversity and nation-specific doctrinal structures on harmonized company law in the EU. With this aim, two emblematic case studies will be analysed. The first case study is related to the definition of 'merger' adopted in the Company Law Directive 2017/1132 (originally in the Third Company Law Directive and the Cross-Border Merger Directive); by relying on the example of the SEVIC case decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), it will be shown that scholars' and courts' conception of the definition of 'merger' varies according to own domestic doctrinal structures. The second case study is related to the notion of 'registered office', which is key for establishing the scope of several harmonizing provisions and the freedom of establishment; this paper analyses terminological fluctuations across language versions of EU legislation and the impact of domestic taxonomies and legal debates upon the interpretation of these notions. These case studies show that company law concepts, despite their highly technical nature, are influenced by discourse constructions conducted within national interpretative communities, and by the language used to draft statutory instruments and discuss legal issues. The task of the CJEU is to counterbalance these local tendencies, and yet it is unlikely that doctrinal structures, rooted in national languages and legal cultures, will disappear.

Abstract
According to the EC Directive on Takeover Bids, defensive measures should be authorised by the general meeting of the target company. The incumbent board can, nonetheless, search for a competing bid, a so-called "white knight". The rationale underpinning this exception is that competing bids always benefit target's shareholders. In this paper I will tackle this rationale, arguing that even competing bids could generate a pressure to tender on target's shareholders and, therefore, in this case should not be considered as a benefit for them.