Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-04T23:35:53.656Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - Some aspects of capital maintenance law in the UK

from PART 1 - Perspectives in company law, SECTION 2: Corporate governance, shareholders' rights and auditing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2010

Michel Tison
Affiliation:
Universiteit Gent, Belgium
Hans De Wulf
Affiliation:
Universiteit Gent, Belgium
Christoph Van der Elst
Affiliation:
Universiteit Gent, Belgium
Reinhard Steennot
Affiliation:
Universiteit Gent, Belgium
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The corporate form is used pervasively in the United Kingdom. In 2005 there were 1,968,000 private companies (‘Ltd’) and 11,600 public companies (‘Plc’) on the companies' register. In the year 2004–2005 there were 332,700 new private companies incorporated and 1,100 public companies. In 2005, 43,600 companies were struck off the register and 4,200 were wound up. The rate of new incorporations has been significant: it is estimated that since 1997 new incorporations have risen by over 60% and the number of foreign firms incorporating in the UK has more than quadrupled. A salient feature of UK company law is ease of access to the corporate form. No barriers of any substance are placed in the way of obtaining corporate status. There is a ‘free market’ rationale for ease of incorporation – provided parties are aware that they are dealing with a limited liability company they can protect their own interests. To the extent that the corporate form can be abused, control of abusive practices is by means of a liability rule applied ex post and by an ex ante rule that is designed, for example, to ensure economic viability. Occasionally, UK company law will use a property rule to protect the interests of the dramatis personae of company law. One example of this are the provisions on shareholder pre-emption rights, which use a property protection rule, the conferral of a right of pre-emption, rather than a liability rule, that is, an ex post legal remedy where a shareholder has been unfairly treated by a particularallotment.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Prentice, D., ‘Corporate Personality, Limited Liability and the Protection of Creditors’, in Rickett, and Grantham, , Corporate Personality in the 20th Century (Hart, 1998), Ch. 6.Google Scholar
Morse, G. (gen. ed.), Palmer's Company Law: Annotated Guide to Companies Act 2006 (London: Thompson, Sweet & Maxwell, 2007), 49–51.
Wymeersch, E., ‘Reforming the Second Company Law Directive’, Financial Law Institute Working Paper No. WP2006–15, November 2006.Google Scholar
Armour, J., ‘Share Capital and Creditor Protection: Efficient Rules for a Modern Company Law?’, 63 Modern Law Review (2000), 355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armour, J.Legal Capital: An Outdated Concept?’, European Business Organisation Law Review, 7 (2006), 5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferran, E., ‘The Place for Creditor Protection on the Agenda for Modernisation of Company Law in the European Union’, European Company and Financial Law Review, 3 (2006), 178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rickford, J. (ed.), ‘Reforming Capital: Report of the Interdisciplinary Group on Capital Maintenance’, European Business Law Review, 15 (2004), (hereafter ‘Rickford Report’).
Ferran, E., ‘Corporate Transactions And Financial Assistance: Shifting Policy Perceptions But Static Law’, Cambridge Law Journal, 63 (2004), 225, and Rickford Report, (note 35, above), 25–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferran, E., ‘Simplification of European Company Law on Financial Assistance’, European Business Organization Law Review, 6 (2005), 93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferran, E., ‘Company Law and Corporate Finance’, (Oxford University Press, 1999), 368.Google Scholar
Hannigan, B. and Prentice, D. (eds.), The Companies Act 2006 – A Commentary (London: LexisNexis Butterworths, 2007), 175.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×