Collective Action Problems in Chinese Takeover Rules: Deficiency and Difficulty in Protecting Target Shareholders in a Hybrid Regime

China is in a process of upgrading its corporate law and corporate governance regime. The reform involves a learning process of incorporating corporate governance norms from other jurisdictions. In the field of takeover rules, China’s hybrid regime is a combination of some elements from both the US...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European business law review 2021-10, Vol.32 (Issue 5), p.905-934
Hauptverfasser: Shen, Wei, Mengshan Xu, Colin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 934
container_issue Issue 5
container_start_page 905
container_title European business law review
container_volume 32
creator Shen, Wei
Mengshan Xu, Colin
description China is in a process of upgrading its corporate law and corporate governance regime. The reform involves a learning process of incorporating corporate governance norms from other jurisdictions. In the field of takeover rules, China’s hybrid regime is a combination of some elements from both the US model and the UK model, reflecting China’s pragmatic approach towards rule of law and legislative reform. Though flexible and pragmatic, this transplant approach without taking into account China’s own economic, social and even political scenarios is of little help to address the agency problem embedded in China’s concentrated shareholding model faced by its SOEs and family–controlled enterprises let alone the shareholder protection rules investors are keen to have. A comparative study is conducted in this article to investigate the collective action problems the Chinse takeover rules fail to address. Autonomy of sport, Private International Law, Public-private Governance, Corruption, Transnational Legal Order, Sports Economy, Legal Status of Sporting Organisations, Audit, Managerial Transparency, Economic Monitoring, International Sporting Convention
doi_str_mv 10.54648/EULR2021032
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3125960241</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3125960241</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c651-96559194ff61c504409fc36763ae3c78b9c1efb070f18ee6053bfa67ba4355643</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkE9PAjEUxBujiYje_ABNvLrabv8s9UYQxYREg3jedMsrFJcttrske_eDu4AHTjMvmfm9ZBC6peRBcMkHj-Ov6SwlKSUsPUM9ooRKpOL0_MRfoqsY14SQNCO8h35HvizB1G4HeNiJr_BH8EUJm4hdhUcrV0EEPNff4HcQ8KwpIT7hZ7DOOKhMi3W1wM_OdndT1u2-1AHqPbJadr2whBp_rnSAlS8XEA5YjSdtEdwCz2DpNnCNLqwuI9z8ax_NX8bz0SSZvr--jYbTxEhBEyWFUFRxayU1gnBOlDVMZpJpYCYbFMpQsAXJiKUDAEkEK6yWWaE5E0Jy1kd3R-w2-J8GYp2vfROq7mPOaCqUJCmnXer-mDLBxxjA5tvgNjq0OSX5Yeb8ZGb2B3cBcCQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3125960241</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Collective Action Problems in Chinese Takeover Rules: Deficiency and Difficulty in Protecting Target Shareholders in a Hybrid Regime</title><source>ProQuest One Community College</source><source>ProQuest Central Korea</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><source>ProQuest Central</source><creator>Shen, Wei ; Mengshan Xu, Colin</creator><creatorcontrib>Shen, Wei ; Mengshan Xu, Colin</creatorcontrib><description>China is in a process of upgrading its corporate law and corporate governance regime. The reform involves a learning process of incorporating corporate governance norms from other jurisdictions. In the field of takeover rules, China’s hybrid regime is a combination of some elements from both the US model and the UK model, reflecting China’s pragmatic approach towards rule of law and legislative reform. Though flexible and pragmatic, this transplant approach without taking into account China’s own economic, social and even political scenarios is of little help to address the agency problem embedded in China’s concentrated shareholding model faced by its SOEs and family–controlled enterprises let alone the shareholder protection rules investors are keen to have. A comparative study is conducted in this article to investigate the collective action problems the Chinse takeover rules fail to address. Autonomy of sport, Private International Law, Public-private Governance, Corruption, Transnational Legal Order, Sports Economy, Legal Status of Sporting Organisations, Audit, Managerial Transparency, Economic Monitoring, International Sporting Convention</description><identifier>ISSN: 0959-6941</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 0959-6941</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1875-841X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.54648/EULR2021032</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Aspen Publishers, Inc</publisher><subject>Capital markets ; Capitalism ; Collective action ; Corporate governance ; Handbooks ; Jurisdiction ; Law schools ; Market economies ; Regulation ; Stockholders</subject><ispartof>European business law review, 2021-10, Vol.32 (Issue 5), p.905-934</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2021 Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/3125960241?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21388,21391,27924,27925,33744,34005,43805,43953,64385,64389,72469,73128,73129,73131</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Shen, Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mengshan Xu, Colin</creatorcontrib><title>Collective Action Problems in Chinese Takeover Rules: Deficiency and Difficulty in Protecting Target Shareholders in a Hybrid Regime</title><title>European business law review</title><description>China is in a process of upgrading its corporate law and corporate governance regime. The reform involves a learning process of incorporating corporate governance norms from other jurisdictions. In the field of takeover rules, China’s hybrid regime is a combination of some elements from both the US model and the UK model, reflecting China’s pragmatic approach towards rule of law and legislative reform. Though flexible and pragmatic, this transplant approach without taking into account China’s own economic, social and even political scenarios is of little help to address the agency problem embedded in China’s concentrated shareholding model faced by its SOEs and family–controlled enterprises let alone the shareholder protection rules investors are keen to have. A comparative study is conducted in this article to investigate the collective action problems the Chinse takeover rules fail to address. Autonomy of sport, Private International Law, Public-private Governance, Corruption, Transnational Legal Order, Sports Economy, Legal Status of Sporting Organisations, Audit, Managerial Transparency, Economic Monitoring, International Sporting Convention</description><subject>Capital markets</subject><subject>Capitalism</subject><subject>Collective action</subject><subject>Corporate governance</subject><subject>Handbooks</subject><subject>Jurisdiction</subject><subject>Law schools</subject><subject>Market economies</subject><subject>Regulation</subject><subject>Stockholders</subject><issn>0959-6941</issn><issn>0959-6941</issn><issn>1875-841X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpNkE9PAjEUxBujiYje_ABNvLrabv8s9UYQxYREg3jedMsrFJcttrske_eDu4AHTjMvmfm9ZBC6peRBcMkHj-Ov6SwlKSUsPUM9ooRKpOL0_MRfoqsY14SQNCO8h35HvizB1G4HeNiJr_BH8EUJm4hdhUcrV0EEPNff4HcQ8KwpIT7hZ7DOOKhMi3W1wM_OdndT1u2-1AHqPbJadr2whBp_rnSAlS8XEA5YjSdtEdwCz2DpNnCNLqwuI9z8ax_NX8bz0SSZvr--jYbTxEhBEyWFUFRxayU1gnBOlDVMZpJpYCYbFMpQsAXJiKUDAEkEK6yWWaE5E0Jy1kd3R-w2-J8GYp2vfROq7mPOaCqUJCmnXer-mDLBxxjA5tvgNjq0OSX5Yeb8ZGb2B3cBcCQ</recordid><startdate>20211001</startdate><enddate>20211001</enddate><creator>Shen, Wei</creator><creator>Mengshan Xu, Colin</creator><general>Aspen Publishers, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AXJJW</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0Q</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20211001</creationdate><title>Collective Action Problems in Chinese Takeover Rules: Deficiency and Difficulty in Protecting Target Shareholders in a Hybrid Regime</title><author>Shen, Wei ; Mengshan Xu, Colin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c651-96559194ff61c504409fc36763ae3c78b9c1efb070f18ee6053bfa67ba4355643</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Capital markets</topic><topic>Capitalism</topic><topic>Collective action</topic><topic>Corporate governance</topic><topic>Handbooks</topic><topic>Jurisdiction</topic><topic>Law schools</topic><topic>Market economies</topic><topic>Regulation</topic><topic>Stockholders</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Shen, Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mengshan Xu, Colin</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Access via ABI/INFORM (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Asian &amp; European Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>European Business Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>European business law review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Shen, Wei</au><au>Mengshan Xu, Colin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Collective Action Problems in Chinese Takeover Rules: Deficiency and Difficulty in Protecting Target Shareholders in a Hybrid Regime</atitle><jtitle>European business law review</jtitle><date>2021-10-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>Issue 5</issue><spage>905</spage><epage>934</epage><pages>905-934</pages><issn>0959-6941</issn><eissn>0959-6941</eissn><eissn>1875-841X</eissn><abstract>China is in a process of upgrading its corporate law and corporate governance regime. The reform involves a learning process of incorporating corporate governance norms from other jurisdictions. In the field of takeover rules, China’s hybrid regime is a combination of some elements from both the US model and the UK model, reflecting China’s pragmatic approach towards rule of law and legislative reform. Though flexible and pragmatic, this transplant approach without taking into account China’s own economic, social and even political scenarios is of little help to address the agency problem embedded in China’s concentrated shareholding model faced by its SOEs and family–controlled enterprises let alone the shareholder protection rules investors are keen to have. A comparative study is conducted in this article to investigate the collective action problems the Chinse takeover rules fail to address. Autonomy of sport, Private International Law, Public-private Governance, Corruption, Transnational Legal Order, Sports Economy, Legal Status of Sporting Organisations, Audit, Managerial Transparency, Economic Monitoring, International Sporting Convention</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Aspen Publishers, Inc</pub><doi>10.54648/EULR2021032</doi><tpages>30</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0959-6941
ispartof European business law review, 2021-10, Vol.32 (Issue 5), p.905-934
issn 0959-6941
0959-6941
1875-841X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_3125960241
source ProQuest One Community College; ProQuest Central Korea; ProQuest Central UK/Ireland; ProQuest Central
subjects Capital markets
Capitalism
Collective action
Corporate governance
Handbooks
Jurisdiction
Law schools
Market economies
Regulation
Stockholders
title Collective Action Problems in Chinese Takeover Rules: Deficiency and Difficulty in Protecting Target Shareholders in a Hybrid Regime
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T21%3A16%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Collective%20Action%20Problems%20in%20Chinese%20Takeover%20Rules:%20Deficiency%20and%20Difficulty%20in%20Protecting%20Target%20Shareholders%20in%20a%20Hybrid%20Regime&rft.jtitle=European%20business%20law%20review&rft.au=Shen,%20Wei&rft.date=2021-10-01&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=Issue%205&rft.spage=905&rft.epage=934&rft.pages=905-934&rft.issn=0959-6941&rft.eissn=0959-6941&rft_id=info:doi/10.54648/EULR2021032&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3125960241%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3125960241&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true