No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 May 2025
1 See eg Pollman, E and Thompson, R (eds) Research Handbook on Corporate Purpose and Personhood (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2021)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Yan, M ‘Shareholder control in the context of corporate social responsibility – a fundamental challenge to modern corporations’ (2020) 50 Hong Kong Law Journal 1057 Google Scholar.
2 See eg Means, B and Yockey, J (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Social Enterprise Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018) p 1Google Scholar.
3 See British Council ‘The state of social enterprise in Bangladesh, Ghana, India and Pakistan’ (2016) available at https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/bc-report-ch6-digital_0.pdf.
4 See British Council ‘The state of social enterprise in South East Asia’ (2021) p 32, available at https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/the_state_of_social_enterprise_in_south_east_asia_0.pdf.
5 Lim, E Social Enterprises in Asia: A New Legal Form (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
6 Ibid, pp 22–26.
7 For example, the evidence gathered from the British Council’s surveys does not suggest that existing legal forms constitute a major barrier or that a new bespoke form is necessary. See British Council, above n 4.
8 Lim, above n 5, p 20.
9 Ibid, pp 26–43.
10 Ibid, p 53.
11 Ibid, p 51 (emphasis added).
12 Ibid, p 61.
13 Just as pointed out by Reiser and Dean, ‘[t]hey advance no prioritization of social goals whatsoever’: Reiser, D and Dean, S Social Enterprise Law: Trust, Public Benefit and Capital Markets (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017) p 54 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
14 Lim, above n 5, p 48.
15 This approach is referred to by Professor Lim as the ‘expenditure test’: ibid, p 69.
16 Indeed, the extensive powers conferred upon shareholders, including the exclusive right to hold directors accountable by initiating legal action either in their own name or on behalf of the company, precisely reflect their prime position within the corporate governance framework of traditionally for-profit companies as well.
17 Lim, above n 5, p 88.
18 Ibid, p 90.
19 Ibid, p 94.
20 Ibid, p 98.
21 Ibid, p 110.
22 Ibid, p 111.
23 Ibid, p 113.
24 Ibid, p 114.
25 Ibid, p 115.
26 Ibid, p 6.
27 Ibid, p 130.
28 Ibid, p 139.
29 Ibid, pp 137–138.
30 Ibid, p 140.
31 Ibid, p 141.
32 Ibid, p 148.
33 J Liptrap ‘British social enterprise law’ (2021) 21 Journal of Corporate Law Studies 595 at 619.
34 For example, in a French social enterprise company, the highest-paid director’s salary, including bonuses, must not exceed ten times the annual salary of a full-time employee based on legal working hours and the minimum wage. See Law No 2014-856 of 31 July 2014 on Social and Solidarity Economy (à l’économie sociale et solidaire), Art 11(3), available at https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000029313296.
35 Lim, above n 5, p 162.
36 Ibid, p 167.