This study aims to examine the spillover effect of right offerings to the industry on the Indonesian Stock Exchange in the period 2009-2016. This study is designed using event study methodology. In ...total, there are 96 issuing companies (issuers) and 1205 non-issuing companies (non-issuers) used as the sample which was obtained using a purposive sampling technique. The test for information content on the right issues was conducted using standard t-test on the average cumulative abnormal return of issuers and non-issuers in the period t-10 to t+10 around the issuance. The research found positive abnormal returns for issuers in t0 to t+4 but did not confirm the spillover effect to non-issuers over the observed (window) periods. The average cumulative abnormal returns are randomly distributed during the window period. These results confirm the absence of intraindustry effect of right issues on the non-issuers’ performance
The mandatory bid rule (MBR), one of the basic tenets of takeover regulation, obligates an acquirer who obtains 'control' over a target company to make an offer to acquire the shares of the remaining ...shareholders. What amounts to 'control' is far from clear; some jurisdictions follow a quantitative approach based on a specific shareholding threshold such as 30% voting rights, while others follow a qualitative approach through a subjective determination based on several factors, such as the specific rights available to an acquirer under a shareholders' agreement or the constitutional documents of a target.
The goal of this article is to consider the merits and demerits of these approaches. It seeks to do so by examining various models adopted in jurisdictions for pegging 'control' so as to invoke the MBR. It delves into the regulatory experience in India as that jurisdiction not only adopts a combined approach (taking into account both the quantitative and qualitative tests for control), but has also been subject to a great deal of controversy and litigation in recent years that have helped tease out the jurisprudential contours of the concept. It concludes with a normative assessment that points towards partial harmonisation.
The mandatory bid rule (MBR), one of the basic tenets of takeover regulation, obligates an acquirer who obtains 'control' over a target company to make an offer to acquire the shares of the remaining ...shareholders. What amounts to 'control' is far from clear; some jurisdictions follow a quantitative approach based on a specific shareholding threshold such as 30% voting rights, while others follow a qualitative approach through a subjective determination based on several factors, such as the specific rights available to an acquirer under a shareholders' agreement or the constitutional documents of a target. The goal of this article is to consider the merits and demerits of these approaches. It seeks to do so by examining various models adopted in jurisdictions for pegging 'control' so as to invoke the MBR. It delves into the regulatory experience in India as that jurisdiction not only adopts a combined approach (taking into account both the quantitative and qualitative tests for control), but has also been subject to a great deal of controversy and litigation in recent years that have helped tease out the jurisprudential contours of the concept. It concludes with a normative assessment that points towards partial harmonisation.
AusBiotech Investment offers a comprehensive series of national and international investor events as a global platform for Australian life sciences companies to showcase their company's offering for ...partnership and investment.
AusBiotech Investment offers a comprehensive series of national and international investor events as a global platform for Australian life sciences companies to showcase their company's offering for ...partnership and investment.
The main purpose of this article is to scrutinize the opportunities married women had to administer their inheritance and reversions compared to widows' opportunities to administer their inheritance, ...dower and share from the former marriage. It has been claimed that medieval women had to wait until they were widowed to take charge over their own property. In this article I challenge this view. I argue that a noble woman's opportunities to act independently depended on the origins of the property she wanted to sell, and if male representatives from that family laid claim to the land or not.
I investigate all written transactions carried out by freeholders and transactions carried out by noble families in two different regions in present-day Sweden during the period from 1300 to 1500. I establish in what type of transactions the women stood as sole executors in the charters, and if they were named as wives or as widows. I also investigate if they participated in varied forms of transactions when widowed compared to when they were in marriage.
The principal result is that the wife of a freeholder did not execute deeds herself. This was done by her husband or, when she was young, by her brother. It was extremely rare that a woman of this status administered her inheritance herself, due to the stronger pre-emptive rights for men besides the brother in Jämtland. As wealthy widows, however, women in this position sometimes executed deeds, presumably because their brothers were dead. Noble women administered their property more frequently. Their pre-emptive rights were stronger and they therefore had more property to dispose of. In the absence of men from the noble family from where the land originated, noble women could act independently, irrespective of if they were widows or wives.
Globalization has made possible the Ahmadinejad effect, where minor actors on the world stage can rise to prominence and solidify their power base at home by posing realistic threats to the security ...of even distant lands. The case of Ahmadinejad, as with Saddam Hussein before, raises the issue of pre-emptive duties (and rights), what is owed to others toward upholding rights that could be threatened sometime in the future. Pre-emptive duties and rights are given importance based on psychological assumptions about how people would behave if certain conditions were to come about. For example, checks and balances in the United States constitution are intended to prevent the concentration of power, on the assumption, supported by recent psychological research, that ‘‘power corrupts.’’ The concentration of power in the United States at the global level, and in the executive branch of the American government during the presidency of George W. Bush, seems to reflect this demonstrated tendency.
The shareholders in general meeting and board of directors are the main governing;
organs of a company. Control of the general meeting theoretically ensures control of;
the composition of the board ...of directors who are usually empowered by the articles;
to manage the day-to-day administration of the company. The company acts by;
shareholders and directors voting and passing resolutions in general meeting and;
board meetings respectively. Controlling sufficient votes to pass resolutions in general;
and board meetings is therefore the essence of corporate control. A shareholder's;
right to vote in general meeting is a proprietary legal right, severable from the other;
incidents of share ownership. By aggregating voting rights, or limiting the scope of the;
voting rights of some shareholders, or restricting ownership of voting rights to certain;
specified persons, voting control in the general meeting may be acquired.
LL.M
Private Law
Studie podává kritický přehled vývoje československého právního diskursu nad spoluvlastnickým předkupním právem (zákonným předkupním právem spoluvlastníků) od počátku 50. let XX. stol. do ...současnosti, vztahující se k po delší čas diskutované otázce, zdali také bezplatné převody spoluvlastnického podílu mohou být podřazeny uvedenému spoluvlastnickému předkupnímu právu. Spoluvlastnické předkupní
právo má své kořeny ve starším právu ssutí (retraktu), avšak jeho moderní znovuzrození v českém právním řádu je spojeno se švýcarským Civilním zákoníkem (ZGB) z roku 1912. Jeho vlivem došlo postupně kvelké vlně znovuoživení tohoto institutu napříč Evropou: počínaje Tureckem,Lichtenštejnskem a Ruskem, později se rozšířivší do Československa,Maďarska, Jugoslávie, Bulharska, Norska, Německé demokratické republiky, Litvy, Estonska a jiných zemí. Článek se rovněž zaměřuje na argumentační strategie českých odpůrců institutu, včetně jejich zjednodušujícího nálepkování institutu coby „socialistického“, navzdory
jeho dlouhé historii a přestože představuje stabilní součást právního řádu zemí jako Švýcarsko, Španělsko či Norsko, jakož i navzdory skutečnosti, že ještě mnohem více dalších zemí užívá institut pro některé zvláštní právní vztahy (např. v oblasti zemědělského vlastnictví).Převážně technická otázka po vhodnosti či nevhodnosti institutu a jeho případně možného právního tvaru či variet byla v rámci českého odborného diskursu znesnadňována a narušována vnášením vágních ideologických tvrzení. Článek se kloní k názoru, že spoluvlastnické zákonné předkupní právo může být významným prvkem, zvyšujícím právní jistotu spoluvlastníků.
Mimo jiné jím dochází k vyvažování některých negativních stránek spoluvlastnictví.Postavení spoluvlastníka je stabilnější a právně jistější, což činí spoluvlastnění atraktivnějším zvláště pro malé spoluvlastníky. Z této příčiny článek stručně kritizuje nový zdejší OZ a jím přivozené změny, dalekosáhle omezující tento právní institut a podržující jej v omezené míře pouze pro některé zvláštní právní poměry.
This paper gives a critical overview of the evolution of the Czech and Czechoslovak legal discourse on the legal institute of the statutory pre-emptive rights of co-owners since the 1950s, especially in relation to the long-disputed question as to whether the unpaid property transfers
(gifts) shall be subordinated under this pre-emption. This statutory pre-emptive right has its roots in the older right of retract, but its modern re-emergence in the Czech legal order is connected with the modern Swiss Civil Code of 1907 (1912). Its influence has started a great wave of the revival of
this institute across Europe: starting with Russia, Liechtenstein and Turkey, and later spreading to Czechoslovakia,Hungary,Yugoslavia, Bulgaria,Norway, German Democratic Republic, Lithaunia, Estonia and other countries. The article also focuses on the argumentation strategies of Czech
adversaries of this legal institute, including the simplifiing tactics of labelling it as “socialist” despite of its long history and despite of the fact, that it represents a stable component of the law in countries such as Spain, Switzerland and Norway, and that many more countries are using this institute in certain special legal relationships (especially in agricultural co-ownership). The predominantly technical question of the suitability or non-suitability of this legal institute in its many forms has been largely undermined by the introduction of vague ideological assertions into the scholarly debate in the Czech Republic. The article argues that the statutory pre-emptive rights of co-owners might play an important role in increasing legal certainty of co-owners and, by this, in counterbalancing someof more negative aspects of co-ownership and making it more stable and attractive for small co-owners. For this reason, the paper criticises the new Czech Civil Code and its changes, liquidating this legal institute and retaining it only for two special legal relationships.
PDF
