The ownership structure in Sweden is characterized by a few controlling owners who often base their ownership of a lower capital investment than in many other countries. The separation of ownership and control is determined by control-boosting mechanisms and is a constantly debated topic. These mechanisms are used to control companies without having to bear the bulk of the capital, and the criticism centers around concerns that companies with control-boosting mechanisms are not managed as well as companies without them. The purpose of the study was to examine the use of control enhancing mechanisms and its effect on the market value of Swedish companies on Nasdaq Stockholm. The study adopted a quantitative form with hypotheses testing. The data collection has been made through annual reports of the sample and then statistically tested in SPSS through multiple regression. The use of vote-strong shares was shown to have a strong positive effect on the value of a company. Minor effects proven came from the difference between the largest owner's voting share and capital contribution, and of the percentage of the total votes held by the largest owner. These two, however, counteracted each other in approximately equal amounts. Not offering their vote-strong shares to on the public exchange is suggested to be strongly negative, but this could not be ascertained. Type of ownership and age were both insignificant in their ability to explain company value.

La tesi ha ad oggetto l’analisi delle fattispecie statutarie di riscatto azionario nella s.p.a. dopo la riforma del 2003. Quest’ultima ha anzitutto introdotto una disciplina destinata genericamente a tutte le ipotesi statutarie in cui si preveda un potere di riscatto a vantaggio della società o di soci (art. 2437-sexies c.c.). L’esegesi di tale disciplina e l’indagine sui possibili utilizzi, in chiave funzionale, delle azioni riscattabili costituiscono il primo obiettivo del lavoro. Per quanto attiene al c.d. riscatto obbligatorio di azioni si è invece assistito alla sola emersione di alcune specifiche ipotesi legali (ad es., art. 2355-bis, comma 2°, c.c.). Si dimostra, tuttavia, che non sussistono ragioni per negare, in linea generale, la possibilità per l’autonomia privata di avvalersi di tale meccanismo di riscatto in ipotesi diverse da quelle espressamente tipizzate. La ricostruzione della disciplina delle fattispecie statutarie atipiche di riscatto obbligatorio e la loro valorizzazione quali peculiari strumenti di disinvestimento dalla società - con caratteristiche non del tutto sovrapponibili al recesso convenzionale - costituiscono il secondo indirizzo d’analisi seguito nello sviluppo della tesi. Nell’affrontare i vari profili trattati, si tiene in attenta considerazione la disciplina comunitaria in tema di riscatto azionario, nonché il dato comparatistico. / The scrutiny of the rules concerning the redemption of shares in the Italian public companies (s.p.a.) after the statutory reform of 2003 is the main focus of the thesis. On the one hand , the reform has introduced a general discipline concerning the provisions of the bylaws that provide a call for redemption of issued shares (art. 2437-sexies c.c.). Under this general aspect the first goal of the work is to analyze both the new general discipline concerning the callable redeemable shares and their functional use. On the other hand, the reform has ruled only a few typical hypothesis of the so called mandatory redemption (for example, art. 2355, par. 2 , c.c.). However, the work points out that there is no reason why to deny private autonomy to use this second form of redemption in cases other than those explicitly ruled. So, the second objective of the thesis is to reconstruct the discipline of the otherwise agreements concerning the matter of the mandatory redemption provisions. The thesis points out that the puttable redeemable shares represent a tool for divestment from public companies with autonomous characteristics in respect to the withdrawal from corporation clauses. To address the various issues considered, are taken into careful consideration both the EU rules concerning share redemption, and the comparative law perspective .