Экзамен зачет учебный год 2023 / Степанов Д.И. Интересы юридического лица и его участников

Свободная трибуна

References

Adamovich G. Problemy primeneniya instituta zloupotrbleniya pravom v aktsionernykh pravootnosheniyakh [Some Problems of the Abuse of Right in Corporate Legal Relations] (in Russian) // Economy and Law. 2005. № 5. P. 60–61.

Aleshschev I. O razvitii kontseptsii korporativnogo kontrolya [On the Development of the Concept of Corporate Control] (in Russian) // Corporate Disputes. 2009. № 3. P. 46–52.

Amoroso L., Vilfredo Pareto, 6 Econometrica 1 (1938).

Anabtawi I. and Stout L., Fiduciary Duties for Activist Shareholders, 60 Stan. L. Rev.1255 (2008).

Anabtawi I. Some Skepticism About Increasing Shareholder Power, 53 Ucla L. Rev. 561 (2006).

Armour J., Cheffins B.R., and Skeel D.A., Jr., Corporate Ownership Structure and the Evolution of Bankruptcy Law: Lessons from the United Kingdom, 55 Vand. L. Rev. 1699 (2002).

Arrow K.J., A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare, 58 J. Pol. Econ. 328 (1950).

Arrow K.J., Social Choice and Individual Values (2nd ed., Yale University Press, 1963).

Austen-Smith D. and Banks J.S., Political Theory II: Strategy & Structure (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005).

Austen-Smith D. and Banks J.S., Positive Political Theory I: Collective Preference (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1999).

Ayotte K. and Skeel D.A., Jr., Bankruptcy Law as a Liquidity Provider, 80 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1557 (2013).

Bachner T., Creditor Protection in Private Companies: Anglo-German Perspectives for a European Discourse (Cambridge University Press, 2009).

Bainbridge S.M., Participatory Management Within a Theory of the Firm, 21 J. Corp. L. 657 (1996).

Bard D.G., Gertner R., and Picker R., Game Theory and the Law (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1998).

Bebchuk L.A. and Hamdani A., The Elusive Quest for Global Governance Standards, 157 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1263 (2009).

Belyaev D.A. Interesy aktsionernogo obschestva i ponyatie nedobrosovestnosti direktorov [Join-Stock Company Interest and the Concept of Unscrupulous Director] (in Russian) // Russian Laws. 2009. № 5. P. 87–92.

Berle A.A. and Means G.C., The Modern Corporation and Private Property (1932, rev. ed. 1991).

Black B.S., Shareholder Passivity Reexamined, 89 Mich. L. Rev. 520 (1990).

Black D., The Theory of Committees and Elections (Cambridge University Press, 1958).

Blair M.M. and Stout L.A., A Team Production Theory of Corporate Law, 85 Va. L. Rev. 247 (1999).

Blizzard H.W., Jr., Corporations — Corporate Opportunity Doctrine — A Corporate Opportunity Does Not Exist Unless the Corporation Had an Interest or Tangible Expectancy in the Property, 20 Ala. L. Rev. 363 (1968).

Bogatyryov F.O. Otvetstvennost’ direktora za ubytki, prichinyonnye khozyaistvennomu obschestvu [Director’s Liability for Losses Caused to a Company] (in Russian) // Ubytki i praktika ikh vozmescheniya [Damages and Practices of Their Reimbursement] / M.A. Rozkova (ed.). Moscow, 2006. P. 372–403.

Border K.C. and Jordan J.S., Straightforward Elections, Unanimity and Phantom Voters, 50 Rev. Econ. Stud. 153 (1983).

Buchanan J.M., The Relevance of Pareto Optimality, 6 J. Conflict Res. 341 (1962).

Burgman D.A. and Cox P.N., Reappraising the Role of the Shareholder in the Modern Public Corporation: Weinberger’s Procedural Approach to Fairness in Freezeouts, 1984 Wisc. L. Rev. 593 (1984).

Campbell C.D. and Tullock G., A Measure of the Importance of Cyclical Majorities, 75 Econ. J. 853 (1965).

79

Вестник экономического правосудия Российской Федерации № 1/2015

Campbell C.D. and Tullock G., The Paradox of Voting — A Possible Method of Calculation, 60 Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 684 (1966).

Carney W.J., Does Defining Constituencies Matter?, 59 U. Cin. L. Rev. 385 (1990).

Case Comment, Corporations: Dominant Shareholder in Close Corporation Allowed To Vote Without Regard to Interests of the Corporation, 49 Minn. L. Rev. 745 (1965).

Chemerinsky E., The Supreme Court, 1988 Term-Foreword: The Vanishing Constitution, 103 Harv. L. Rev. 43 (1989).

Coffee J.C., Jr., The Rise of Dispersed Ownership: The Roles of Law and the State in the Separation of Ownership and Control, 111 Yale L.J. 1 (2001).

Coleman J.L., Efficiency, Utility, and Wealth Maximization, 8 Hofstra L. Rev. 509 (1980).

Crawford V.P., A Game of Fair Division, 44 Rev. Econ. Stud. 235 (1977).

Danilova S.S. Interes khozyaistvennogo obschestva v korporativnom prave RF i Germanii: ponyatie, soderzhanie [Company’s Interest in Russian and German Law: Its Concept and Content] (in Russian) // Business Law. 2013. № 3. P. 37–46.

Dow G.K., The New Institutional Economics and Employment Regulation, in: Government Regulation of the Employment Relationship 57 (Bruce E. Kaufman ed., Madison, WI: Industrial Relations Research Association, 1997).

Dudchenko A.U. Grazhdansko-pravovye sposoby zaschity prav i zakonnykh interesov uchastnikov korporativnykh pravootnosheniy pri nedruzhestvennom sliyanii i pogloschenii khozyaistvennykh obschestv: avtoref. dis. … kand. jurid. nauk [Civil Remedies Available to Participants of Corporate Relations in Case of a Hostile Takeover of a Company: A Summary of a PhD Thesis in Law]

(in Russian). Krasnodar, 2008.

Easterbrook F., Ways of Criticizing the Court, 95 Harv. L. Rev. 802 (1982).

Easterbrook F.H. and Fischel D.R., Voting in Corporate Law, 26 J.L. & Econ. 395 (1983).

Em V.S. Kategoriya obyazannosti v sovetskom graghdanskom prave (voprosy teorii): dis. … kand. jurid. nauk [The Concept of an Obligation in the Soviet Civil Law (Theoretical Issues): A PhD Thesis in Law] (in Russian). Moscow, 1981.

Fama E. and Jensen M.C., Separation of Ownership and Control, 26 J.L. & Econ. 301 (1983).

Fuller J. and Jensen M.C., Just Say No to Wall Street: Putting a Stop to the Earnings Game, 22 J. Applied Corp. Fin. 59 (2010).

Gevurtz F.A., Who Represents the Corporation — In Search of a Better Method for Determining the Corporate Interest in Derivative Suits, 46 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 271 (1985).

Gibbard A., Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result, 41 Econometrica 587 (1973).

Gilson R.J., Globalizing Corporate Governance: Convergence of Form or Function, 49 Am. J. Comp. L. 329 (2001).

Gordon J.N., Shareholder Initiative: A Social Choice and Game Theoretic Approach to Corporate Law, 60 U. Cin. L. Rev. 347 (1991).

Gribanov V.P. Osuschestvleniye i zaschita grazhdanskikh prav [Exercise and Protection of Civil Rights] (in Russian). Moscow, 2000.

Grofman B., Public Choice, Civic Republicanism, and American Politics: Perspectives of a «Reasonable Choice» Modeler, 71 Tex. L. Rev. 1541 (1993).

Hansmann H. and Kraakman R., The End of History for Corporate Law, 89 Geo. L. J. 439 (2001).

Hansmann H. The Ownership of Enterprise (Harvard University Press, 1996).

Hayden G. and Bodie M., Arrow’s Theorem and the Exclusive Shareholder Franchise, 62 Vand. L. Rev. 1217 (2009).

80

Свободная трибуна

Hayden G. and Bodie M., Shareholder Democracy and the Curious Turn Toward Board Primacy, 51 WM. & Mary L. Rev. 2071 (2010).

Hayden G.M. and Ellis S.E., The Cult of Efficiency in Corporate Law, 5 Va. L. & Bus. Rev. 239 (2010).

Hayden G.M. Some Implications of Arrow’s Theorem for Voting Rights, 47 Stan. L. Rev. 295 (1995).

Hayden G.M. The Limits of Social Choice Theory: A Defense of the Voting Rights Act, 74 Tul. L. Rev. 87 (1999).

Hicks J.R., The Foundations of Welfare Economics, 49 Econ. J. 696 (1939).

Hetherington J.A.C., The Minority’s Duty of Loyalty in Close Corporations, 1972 Duke L.J. 921 (1972).

Hovenkamp H., Neoclassicism and the Separation of Ownership and Control, 4 Va. L. & Bus. Rev. 373 (2009).

Jensen M.C. and Meckling W.H., Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure, 3 J. Fin. Econ. 305 (1976).

Kaldor N., Welfare Propositions of Economics and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility, 49 Econ. J. 549 (1939).

Kaplan S.A., Fiduciary Responsibility in the Management of the Corporation, 31 Bus. Law. 883 (1976).

Katz L., Why the Law Is So Perverse (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011).

Kholmetskaja E.A. Korporativnoe pravo kak element pravovoj sistemy: avtoref. dis. … kand. jurid. nauk [Corporate Law as an Element of the Legal System: A Summary of a PhD Thesis in Law]

(in Russian). Samara, 2012.

Kittsteiner T., Ockenfels A., and Trhal N., Partnership Dissolution Mechanisms in the Laboratory, 117 Econ. Letters 394 (2012).

Kolesov A.P. Grazhdansko-pravovye sposoby zaschity korporativnykh prav i interesov: dis. … kand. jurid. nauk [Civil Remedies for Corporate Rights and Interests: A PhD Thesis in Law] (in Russian). Tver, 2008.

Kornhauser L.A. and Sager L.G., Unpacking the Court, 96 Yale L. J. 82 (1986).

Krasheninnikov E.A. Ohranjaemyj zakonom interes i sredstva ego zashсity // Teorija i praktika prava na sudebnuju zasсhitu i eyo realizacija v grazhdanskom protsesse: mezhvuz. sb. nauch. tr. [Interest Protected by Law and Its Remedies // Theory and Practice of the Right to Access the Court and Its Implementation in Civil Procedure: An Interacademic Collection of Essays] (in Russian). Saratov, 1991. P. 13–14.

La Porta R., Lopez-de-Silanes F., Shleifer A. and Vishny R.W., Law and Finance, 106 J. Pol. Econ. 1113 (1998).

Landeo C.M. and Spier K.E., Shotguns and Deadlocks, 31 Yale J. Reg. 143 (2014).

Levine M.E. and Plott C.R., Agenda Influence and Its Implications, 63 Va. L. Rev. 561 (1977).

Listokin Y., The Pivotal Mechanism and Organizational Control, Yale Law & Economics Research Paper No. 379 (2009), available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1372822 [11.01.2015].

Lohmann S., Rational Choice and Political Science, in: The New Palgrave Dictionary

of Economics (S.N. Durlauf and L.E. Blume eds., Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), available at: http:// www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_R000253 [11.01.2015].

Lomakin D.V. Ot korporativnogo interesa cherez zloupotreblenie korporativnym pravom k korporativnomu sporu [From the Corporate Interest Through the Abuse of Corporate Rights towards a Corporate Dispute] (in Russian) // Corporate Lawyer. 2006. № 2. P. 3–34.

Lomakin D.V. Pravovye problemy opredelenija sub’ektov otvetstvennosti za neobosnovannoe spisanie aktsij [Some Legal Problems of Finding Out Who is Responsible for an Unwarranted Transfer of Shares]

(in Russian) // Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitrazh Court of the Russian Federation. 2007. № 9. P. 44–59.

81

Вестник экономического правосудия Российской Федерации № 1/2015

Makovskaja A.A. Vosstanovlenie korporativnogo kontrolya v sisteme sposobov zaschity korporativnykh prav [Recovery of Corporate Control in the System of Corporate Remedies] (in Russian) // Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitrazh Court of the Russian Federation. 2009. № 1. P. 119–121.

Mal’ko A.V., Subochev V.V. Zakonnye interesy kak pravovaya kategoriya [Legitimate Interests as a Legal Category] (in Russian). Saint Petersburg, 2004.

May K.O., A Set of Independent Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Simple Majority Decision, 20 Econometrica 680 (1952).

Mihajlov S.V. Kategoriya interesa v grazhdanskom (chastnom) prave: dis. … kand. jurid. nauk [The Notion of Interest in Civil (Private) Law: A PhD Thesis in Law] (in Russian). Мoscow, 2000.

Mihajlov S.V. O korporativnom interese [On the Corporate Interest] (in Russian) // Corporations and Institutions. Moscow, 2007. P. 119–126.

Miller N.R., Graph-Theoretical Approaches to the Theory of Voting, 21 Am. J. Pol. Sci. 769 (1977).

Molotnikov A.E. Otvetstvennost’ v aktsionernykh obschestvakh [Liability in Joint-Stock Companies] (in Russian). Moscow, 2006.

Nakamura K., The Vetoers in a Simple Game with Ordinal Preferences, 8 Int. J. Game Theory 55 (1979).

Niemi R.G. and Weisberg H.F., A Mathematical Solution for the Probability of the Paradox of Voting, 13 Behav. Sci. 317 (1968).

Nikologorskaja E.I. Grazhdansko-pravovaya kharakteristika interesov aktsionerov i aktsionernogo obschestva i ikh balansa: dis. … kand. jurid. nauk [A Description of Shareholders’ and Joint-Stock Company’s Interests and Their Balance in Civil Law: A PhD Thesis in Law] (in Russian). Мoscow, 2008.

Osipov A.A. Interes i sub’ektivnoe grazhdanskoe pravo: avtoref. dis. … kand. jurid. nauk [An Interest and a Subjective Civil Right: A Summary of a PhD Thesis in Law] (in Russian). Moscow, 2011.

Pildes R.H. and Anderson E.S., Slinging Arrows at Democracy: Social Choice Theory, Value Pluralism, and Democratic Politics, 90 Colum. L. Rev. 2121 (1990).

Pleshkov D.V. Interes aktsionernogo obschestva v kontekste stat’i 71 Zakona ob AO [Joint-Stock Company’s Interest in the Context of Article 71 of the Joint-Stock Companies Law] (in Russian) // Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitrazh Court of the Russian Federation. 2011. № 1. P. 23–29.

Posner E.A. and Weyl E.G., Quadratic Voting as Efficient Corporate Governance, 81 U. Chi. L. Rev. 251 (2014).

Rozhkova M.A. Zaschita zakonnogo interesa v arbitrazhnom sude [Protecting a Legitimate Interest in Arbitrazh Court] (in Russian) // Economy and Law. 2001. № 6. P. 53–59.

Ruben H., On the Moments of Order Statistics in Samples from Normal Populations, 14 Biometrica 200 (1954).

Sarbash S.V. Vosstanovlenie korporativnogo kontrolya [Recovery of the Corporate Control] (in Russian) // Civil Law Review. 2008. Vol. 8. № 4. P. 74–79.

Satterthwaite M.A., Strategy-Proofness and Arrow’s Conditions: Existence and Correspondence Theorems for Voting Procedures and Social Welfare Functions, 10 J. Econ. Theory 187 (1975).

Schelling T.C., Micromotives and Macrobehavior (N.Y.: W.W. Norton and Company, 1978).

Sen A.K., A Possibility Theorem on Majority Decisions, 34 Econometrica 491 (1966).

Sen A.K., The Possibility of Social Choice, 89 Am. Econ. Rev. 349 (1999).

Shepsle K.A. and Weingast B.R., Uncovered Sets and Sophisticated Voting Outcomes with Implications for Agenda Institutions, 28 Amer. J. Polit. Sci. 49 (1984).

Shepsle K.A., A Note on Zeckhauser’s «Majority Rule with Lotteries on Alternatives»: The Case of the Paradox of Voting, 84 Q. J. Econ. 705 (1970).

82

Свободная трибуна

Shepsle K.A., Analyzing Politics: Rationality, Behavior and Institutions (2nd ed., N.Y.: W.W. Norton & Company, 2010).

Skeel D.A., Jr., Rethinking the Line between Corporate Law and Corporate Bankruptcy, 72 Tex. L. Rev. 471 (1994).

Skeel D.A., Jr., The Past, Present and Future of Debtor-in-Possession Financing, 25 Cardoso L. Rev. 1905 (2004).

Skeel D.A., Jr., When Should Bankruptcy Be an Option (for People, Places or Things)?, 55 WM. & Mary L. Rev. 2217 (2014).

Sneed E., The Factors Affecting the Validity of Stockholder Votes in Adverse Interest, 13 Okla. L. Rev. 373 (1960).

Sneed E., The Stockholder May Vote as He Pleases: Theory and Fact, 22 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 23 (1960).

Stepanov D.I. Aktsionernoe obschestvo — delo dobrovol’noe. Poka v nem ne uchastvuesh. K prodolzheniu diskussii s D.V. Lomakinym [Joint-Stock Company is a Voluntary Matter. Unless You are a Shareholder. A Reply to D.V. Lomakin] (in Russian) // Corporate Lawyer. 2009. № 2. P. 5–12.

Stepanov D.I. Dlya chego neobhodim minimal’nyj ustavnyj kapital i kak opredeljat’ ego uroven’? [Why Do We Need a Minimum Share Capital and How We Should Estimate Its Level?] (in Russian) // Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitrazh Court of the Russian Federation. 2011. № 4. P. 43–53.

Stepanov D.I. Fenomen korporativnogo kontrolya [The Corporate Control Phenomenon] (in Russian) // Civil Law Review. 2009. Vol. 9. № 3. P. 142–206.

Stepanov D.I. I eto tol’ko nachalo. Retsenziya na stat’ju Genri Hansmana i Rejnera Krakmana «Konets istorii korporativnogo prava» // Tsivilisticheskie zapiski: mezhvuz. sb. nauch. tr. Vyp. 4. [And This is Only Beginning. A Review of the Article ‘The End of History For Corporate Law’ by Henry Hansmann and Reiner Kraakman // Civil Essays: An Interacademic Collection of Essays. Vol. 4] (in Russian). Moscow, 2005. P. 564–585;

Stepanov D.I. Ot sub’ekta otvetstvennosti k prirode korporativnykh otnoshenij [From the Responsible Person towards the Nature of Corporate Relations] (in Russian) // Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitrazh Court of the Russian Federation. 2009. № 1. P. 21–23.

Stepanov D.I. Otvetstvennost’ emitenta i registratora za neobosnovannoe spisanie aktsij [The Liability of the Issuer and Registrar for an Unwarranted Transfer of Shares] (in Russian) // Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitrazh Court of the Russian Federation. 2007. № 3. P. 11–31.

Sunstein C.R., Interest Groups in American Public Law, 38 Stan. L. Rev. 29 (1985).

Ulen T.S., An Economic Appreciation of the Bill of Rights: The Limits and Potential of Law and Economics of Law and Economics in Discussing Constitutional Issues, 1992 U. Ill. L. Rev. 189 (1992).

Vickrey W., Utility, Strategy, and Social Decision Rules, 74 Q. J. Econ. 507 (1960).

Zeckhauser R., Majority Rule with Lotteries on Alternatives, 83 Q. J. Econ. 696 (1969).

Zeckhauser R., Voting Systems, Honest Preferences and Pareto Optimality, 67 Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. 934 (1973).

Zorina E.S. Pravovoye regulirovanie korporativnykh otnosheniy v aktsionernykh obschestvakh: dis. … kand. jurid. nauk [Regulation of Corporate Relations in Joint-Stock Companies: A PhD Thesis in Law] (in Russian). Moscow, 2005.

Information about the author

Stepanov Dmitry (Moscow) — PhD in Law, Partner at Egorov, Puginsky, Afanasiev & Partners Law Offices (119017, Moscow, Bol. Ordynka St., 40/5; email: dmitry_stepanov@epam.ru).

83