Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:24:24Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Helga Araruna Ferraz de Alvarenga.pdf: 675382 bytes, checksum: 8dd14f78fa4c302c903e1eb5077cb0dd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-03-17 / This Thesis objective is to promote the discussion about the existence of principles which are specific to the Brazilian Corporate Law. This discussion is led from a context in which the field s doctrine has been not paying enough attention tothe use and value of a principle argumentation, which has contributed to certain immobility regarding the dynamics of this Law field. The first part of this Thesis brings a reconstruction of the principle theory, its influence in Brazil and the particularities of the principle regarding the juridical system. Also, there shall be presented the classical theory on solving contradictions and conflicts among juridical norms, where it shall be defended that the potential antagonism between principles does not configure properly a contradiction better would be to talk about a tension among such elements. The second part stablishes which principles would be useful and necessary to Corporate Law, in addition to pointing out which would be the tensions one could promptly identify between principles or principles and other legal norms. The principles analyzed here are based on a series of constitutional and non-constitutional provisions which, taken into account together, constitute a principle framework unique to the Brazilian context. However, the one thing one has attempted to overstress with careful regard is that the Princípio da Liberdade de Associaçãodoes not relate to Corporate Law even though the doctrine has, historically, said otherwise. It is a fact, though, that two other principles the Princípio da Liberdade de IniciativaandthePrincípio da Legalidade are enough to shelther all the hypothesis which are commonly attributed to theliberdade de associação. Besides, they constitute principles of specific provision towards Corporate Law, not encompassing as is the case with the Princípio da Liberdade de Associação an extensive interpretation of the Law which turns out to be quite problematic. The following principles studied and developed here prove that Corporate Law has a lot to gain from acknowledging principles specific to its field and not only in terms of doctrinary and practical gains, but also in terms of legal certainty and improvement of the Brazilian economic order / Esta Tese tem por objetivo aprofundar a discussão acerca da existência de princípios próprios ao Direito Societário no sistema jurídico brasileiro. A partir da promulgação da Constituição Federal de 1988, juristas brasileiros identificaram um novo enfoque sobre os princípios, gerador de uma verdadeira mudança de paradigma. Aos poucos, nos diversos campos do Direito, a argumentação por princípios firmou-se como padrão na literatura jurídica brasileira. Na contramão desta tendência, o Direito Comercial e mais especificamente no Direito Societário manteve-se à margem desta mudança. De modo geral, a doutrina especializada não tem dispensado a mesma atenção ao tema, o que tem contribuído para um certo engessamento da dinamicidade que é própria ao Direito Societário e para a insegurança jurídica. A primeira parte do trabalho traz uma reconstrução da teoria dos princípios, sua influência no Brasil e as particularidades dos princípiosna ordem jurídica. Além disso, apresenta-se também a teoria clássica de solução de conflitos e contradições entre normas também chamadas antinomias defendendo-se que a relação antagônica entre princípios não configura propriamente uma contradição, e sim um ponto de tensão entre elementos dessa espécie de norma jurídica. A segunda parte desta Tese identifica os princípios informativos que mais se aproximam do Direito Societário, além de apontar quais seriam, de pronto, os pontos de tensão que poderiam surgir entre estes princípios e outros dispositivos legais. Os princípios aqui analisados têm por base uma série de enunciados constitucionais e infra-constitucionais que, em conjunto, constituem um arcabouço principiológico específico à realidade brasileira. No entanto, o que se pretendeu demonstrar com maior cuidado foi que o Princípio da Liberdade de Associação nada tem a acrescentar ao Direito Societário muito embora a doutrina tenha, historicamente, afirmado o contrário. Fato é que dois outros princípios o Princípio da Liberdade de Iniciativa e o Princípio da Legalidade são de previsão específica ao Direito Societário, não sendo, como é o Princípio da Liberdade de Associação, uma extensão interpretativa bastante problemática. Os demais princípios estudados e desenvolvidos comprovam que o Direito Societário tem muito a ganhar com o reconhecimento de institutos principiológicos próprios ao campo e não apenas em termos doutrinários e práticos, mas também em termos de segurança jurídica e de incremento da ordem econômica brasileira

This thesis is a culmination of a research of a particular branch of Corporate Law, which has grown in several major parts of civilized jurisdictions. The thrust of the study was to evaluate the past, present and the future of a particular type of action known in Corporate Law under the umbrella of shareholder remedies - the 'Derivative Action' with emphasis to develop the law in one jurisdiction profiting from another. The research thus reveals how, when and where the so called action originated, the initial effects these actions had on the corporate world including shareholders, companies and related persons natural or juristic. Though much has been written by way of books, treatises and articles and several researches have dealt with the common topic shareholder remedies in its broad perspect, there is no separate study carried out on this topic in its global context with a comparative focus. This study has therefore given me the drive, initiative and courage to look at the conceptual view or the macro view of the so called 'Derivative Action' with of course special emphasis on the Australian and Sri Lankan jurisdictions in its micro aspects. This, I believe is the first time anyone has undertaken such a task. The study thus travels through distant roads of common law action to the statutory form of the action in the relevant jurisdictions and finds it driving with much purpose in jurisdictions such as Australia and Sri Lanka which are both in the transitional era from the common law action to the statutory action. The research is based on the collection of material namely, case law - Australian, Sri Lankan and international on the matters in issue, Legal treatises on the subject matter local and international, Law reform material - Australian, Sri Lankan and international on the topic, Bills and Statutes available on the topic in Australia, Sri Lanka and other countries. I have met resource personnel with regard to Law Reform in several jurisdictions on the matters in issue and visited the Australian Stock Exchange and the Colombo Stock Exchange. The research findings depend mainly on the electronic data available in addition to resources available at the University of Canberra, the Australian National University, Colombo Law Library, The Colombo Law Society Library and the Sri Lanka Supreme Court Judges' Chambers Library and the Sri Lanka Attorney General's Department Library. Visits to the McGill University in Montreal, Canada and the corporate law sector in New Zealand, including Universities and Law Offices in Christchurch and Auckland too has helped me considerably in the process. Review of the literature of the proposed statutory Derivative Action in Australia and the proposed statutory Derivative Action in Sri Lanka, are based mainly on; Enforcement of the duties of directors and officers of a company by means of a statutory derivative action (Report No. 12) Companies and Securities Law Review Committee. (November 1990.), Corporate Practices and the Rights of Shareholders (Report of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs) Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia. (November 1991.), Report on A Statutory Derivative Action Companies and Securities Advisory Committee. (July 1993.), Corporate Law Economic Reform Program (CLERP) Proposal Paper No 3 (1997), the CLERP draft legislative provisions (1998), Australian case law on the application of the common law Derivative Action, both in the High Court and in individual States and Australian articles on Derivative Action as a common law remedy and on the introduction of the statutory action. In the Sri Lankan context, the proposals in Sri Lanka for the statutory Derivative Action and the case law in Sri Lanka on the application of the common law remedy has been referred to. Other literature include, material available on the Canadian formula of Derivative Action, including Statutes, Rules, case law, articles and other relevant data, material available on the Derivative Actions in the United States, material available in New Zealand on Derivative Actions, material available in England on Derivative Actions, namely on the common law approach, case law, articles, Bills, Rules and other connected material, Statutes on Derivative Actions in other jurisdictions at present and Hong Kong proposals for a statutory Derivative Action, to name some. The aforesaid material and the review of the same have assisted the study as follows: -To place the past, present and the future of the common law Derivative Action. -Examine the objectives of the Derivative Action. -The operation of the common law aspects of the action. -The benefits of the statutory form of the action. -Experiences of other countries in the recent past on the subject. -The Australian reform process presently underway. -The best experiences in Australia with regard to case law. -To evaluate whether the remedy should be limited to fraud on the minority or whether it should be extended further even to negligence. -How best Sri Lanka could benefit from the Australian formula of the statutory form of the action. -To evaluate whether the proposed model of the statutory action in Sri Lanka is adequate in view of the Australian and other accepted formulae on the subject. -Whether the common law action should be expressly abolished in Sri Lanka. -Consider the possible introduction of the best methods to Sri Lanka. Finally, the research speaks for itself the need for a statutory Derivative Action for Sri Lanka in the future, to be an improvement on the Canadian, New Zealand and Australian models. The research findings, especially in its conclusions and recommendation in Chapter 8, will no doubt help to improve the proposed statutory Derivative Action in Sri Lanka in a small way.

The demand for a rapid response to constant business developments turns existing corporate legislations and Directives into an obstacle to innovation and progress. Company law’s need for continuously updated and flexible solutions can be accomplished with a model act. In 1950 the US presented its MBCA and there is currently a European working group involved in a voluntary and private project trying to develop a similar model for the EU. An EMCA should cooperate with the competition between Member States and their corporate legislation to further the practice of converging rules within EU company law. The working group needs to study the structure, comprehension, composition and general process of the MBCA project in detail and let the established US project have a greater influence on the EMCA. Concrete examples of what the EMCA group can change in their approach to the project are: 1 Procedure: Make the finished drafted chapters and proposed provisions available for the public. Add more steps to the model act’s development procedure and do not rush the publication and the consulting stages with interested parties. Furthermore, put one reporter in charge of the entire project and its development. 2 Committee: Appoint more corporate law practitioners and professors within closely related areas to corporate law, to members of the Group. Furthermore the “experts” of issues that might occur with the EMCA should be involved during the initial development of the provisions. 3 Material: Reinstate the original objective of initially only providing rules for public companies. Preferably present provisions for private companies in a distinct and separated form at a later stage. If the Working Group were to imitate several of the US procedures for the MBCA project, the EMCA might result in advantageous for the convergence of corporate law within the EU.

The traditional approach to corporate governance in Canada has centered on shareholders. This model of governance is commonly referred to as shareholder primacy. The shareholder primacy model has recently been rejected by the Supreme Court of Canada in Peoples v. Wise and BCE v. 1976 Debentureholders. This paper will be argued that directors should be required to focus exclusively on increasing shareholder value in the change of control context. It is within the change of control context that shareholders most require fiduciary protection. In addition, the shareholder primacy rule provides an enforceable standard for evaluating the actions of directors. As stakeholders have a variety of mechanisms to ensure that their interests are not disregarded, they are not in need of fiduciary protection. In contrast, shareholders face greater risks, which validate a need to be protected by an exclusive fiduciary duty in the change of control context.

The traditional approach to corporate governance in Canada has centered on shareholders. This model of governance is commonly referred to as shareholder primacy. The shareholder primacy model has recently been rejected by the Supreme Court of Canada in Peoples v. Wise and BCE v. 1976 Debentureholders. This paper will be argued that directors should be required to focus exclusively on increasing shareholder value in the change of control context. It is within the change of control context that shareholders most require fiduciary protection. In addition, the shareholder primacy rule provides an enforceable standard for evaluating the actions of directors. As stakeholders have a variety of mechanisms to ensure that their interests are not disregarded, they are not in need of fiduciary protection. In contrast, shareholders face greater risks, which validate a need to be protected by an exclusive fiduciary duty in the change of control context.

La société coopérative européenne (SCE), sœur cadette du GEIE et de la société européenne (SE), a vu le jour le 22 juillet 2003. Nouvelle forme sociale européenne, elle était censée combiner mobilité européenne et identité coopérative, tout en offrant des outils «modernes» de gouvernance et de financement destinés à relever les défis auxquels les coopératives font face. Hélas, en juxtaposant des outils tantôt des droits nationaux, tantôt empruntés à son aînée la SE, le législateur européen s'est perdu et porte ainsi la responsabilité de l'échec d'une SCE qui ne parvient ni à répondre aux besoins des coopératives, ni à créer une identité coopérative européenne, ni à permettre aux coopératives de tirer effectivement avantage du marché unique et à concourir à son développement. Les raisons à cet échec sont multiples. D'une part, la méthode utilisée consistant à s'inspirer largement du statut de la SE néglige la spécificité coopérative et ignore la complexité croissante des droits coopératifs nationaux. Ainsi, l'adoption d'un règlement-cadre offrant un grand nombre d'options aux législateurs nationaux et renvoyant excessivement aux droits coopératifs nationaux, non harmonisés et pour certains d'une complexité sans pareil, aboutit à la création de 30 variantes nationales de la SCE, qui ne conservent d'européen que l'étiquette. L'identité coopérative de la SCE apparaît ainsi comme une identité variable et plus proche de l'identité des coopératives nationales de l'État membre d'immatriculation que de celle des SCE immatriculées dans d'autres États membres. Le législateur européen, soucieux de ménager les susceptibilités nationales et l'autocompréhension nationale des mouvements coopératifs qui diverge fortement entre États membres, a ainsi négligé de doter la SCE d'une identité coopérative européenne assumée et discriminante. D'autre part, les atouts européens de la SCE, comme la constitution par voie de fusion ou le transfert du siège social, répondent mal aux besoins des coopératives, dont l'ancrage local est prononcé à raison du particularisme de leur objet. De même, les outils supposés procurer à la SCE une efficacité économique supérieure déçoivent car importés sans cohérence particulière de droits coopératifs nationaux. L'introduction de cette hétérogénéité aggrave le dilemme interne et externe des coopératives. Pour finir, le législateur communautaire néglige l'environnement disparate dans lequel évoluent les coopératives. En particulier, !'instrumentalisation du droit fiscal par certains États membres, adeptes du concept d'économie sociale, est préjudiciable à la SCE en termes de mobilité et de distorsion de concurrence sous l'angle des aides d'État.Dans ces conditions, la SCE ne paraît pas en mesure de remplir les objectifs fixés par le législateur européen et son échec ne saurait surprendre. Pourtant une autre voie était possible, consistant pour le législateur européen à proposer l'institution d'une coopérative européenne dotée d'une identité discriminante et de la flexibilité nécessaire à son efficacité, offrant ainsi une réelle alternative aux coopératives nationales et permettant de donner au mouvement coopératif européen un nouveau souffle. Pour ce faire, il aurait été nécessaire de se démarquer de la méthode adoptée pour la SE et des droits coopératifs nationaux, de réduire les renvois aux droits nationaux au maximum, de hiérarchiser les principes coopératifs et de recentrer la SCE sur son objet si particulier, tout en flexibilisant les principes coopératifs qui relèvent davantage d'une conviction idéologique que d'une nécessité juridique et qui, partant, ne contribuent pas à conférer à la SCE une identité propre. / The European Co-operative Society (SCE), younger sister of the European Economic Interest Grouping (EEIG) and the European Company (SE), was born on July 22, 2003. New European legal form, the SCE was supposed to combine European mobility with a European co-operative identity, whilst offering co­operatives "modern" tools to improve co-operative governance and financing, the long lasting co-operative dilemma of the last century. Alas, by juxtaposing tools borrowed from national laws or from its predecessor, the SE, the European legislator loses himself and thus bears the responsibility for the failure of the SCE that does not respond ta co-operative needs, nor does it create a European co-operative identity, nor does it allow co-operatives ta effectively benefit from the single market and contribute to its development. Various reasons explain this failure. On the one hand, the method used to draw broadly on the SE statute neglects co-operative features and ignores the increasing complexity of national co-operative laws. Thus, the adoption of a framework regulation offering too many options for national legislators and excessive references ta national co-operative laws that lack harmonization and are for some of them very camplex, results in the creation of 30 national variations of SCE with a European label. The co-operative identity of the SCE appears to be variable and closer to the national identity of co-operatives in the Member State of registration. The European legislator, anxious to spare national sensitivities and the self-understanding of national co-operative movements which strongly differs among Member States, has failed to provide the SCE with an assumed and discriminating European co-operative identity. On the other hand, the European advantages of the SCE like the constitution by way of merger or the transfer of seat do not take into account co-operative needs. Co-operatives have strong local roofs and a very special legal purpose. Similarly, the tools made available to the SCE that are supposed to provide higher economic efficiency disappoint as they are imported from national co-operative law without any consistency. The introduction of this heterogeneity exacerbates the internal and external dilemma of co-operatives. Finally, the European legislator ignores the disparate environment in which co-operatives evolve. In particular, the instrumentalisation of tax law in some Member States who are attached to the concept of social economy is detrimental to the SCE's mobility and distorts competition between SCEs. Under these circumstances, the SCE does not seem able to fulfill the objectives set by the European legislator and its failure is not surprising.Yet another way would have been possible, consisting for the European legislator to propose the creation of a European co-operative with a distinct and discriminating identity and the necessary flexibility to improve efficiency, providing a real alternative to national co-operatives and giving the European co-operative movement new life. To do this, it would have been necessary to stand out from the method adopted for the SE and reduce references to national co-operative law to a maximum, prioritize co-operative principles and refocus the SCE on its particular purpose, white giving more flexibility to co-operative principles which are more of an ideological belief than a legal requirement and therefore do not contribute to give the SCE its own identity.

This dissertation seeks to improve the current understanding of the ways in which institutional reform can promote the development of stock markets in Latin America. Over the past decade, policymakers sought to stimulate the growth of capital markets in the region through the promotion of a standardized set of formal institutions. An example of this approach in the field of company law was the introduction of modern corporate governance practices into nations without a solid enforcement infrastructure. By most accounts, these efforts did not deliver on their promise of stock market development. This work identifies areas for potential reform. As a means to better understand the operation of Latin American stock markets, this dissertation draws from different sources, including the historical experience of industrialized nations, the available literature on institutional reform, the documented shortcomings of legal reform programmes and hand-collected data from various Latin American countries. The resulting analysis suggests that the promotion of Latin American capital markets may require strategies different to those that were set in motion over the past decade. The main contribution of this work is twofold. First, this dissertation brings some nuance to the discussions concerning the challenges faced by Latin American capital markets. A proper understanding of these challenges is essential for policymakers in the region, particularly after the onset of the Latin American Integrated Market. Second, this dissertation explores the use of ‘transitional strategies’ to overcome some of the challenges identified here. The ultimate goal of this project is to inform future reform efforts in Latin America and to offer some insights for policymakers in other emerging countries.

Esta dissertação procura analisar os acordos de acionistas tipificados pelo art. 118 da Lei nº 6.404/76, mais especificamente, os acordos que regulam o exercício do voto e/ou o exercício do poder de controle. O interesse pelo tema é decorrente da falta de consenso da doutrina e da jurisprudência acerca do assunto, o que contribuiu fortemente para a insegurança jurídica no uso do instituto. Além disso, tal falta de consenso foi acentuada com a reforma da lei acionária pela Lei nº 10.303/01. Dessa forma, o presente trabalho busca, a partir da análise da doutrina pátria e da doutrina estrangeira, delimitar corretamente os principais conceitos acerca do acordo de voto. Com este objetivo, o presente trabalho começa com a análise das características históricas das sociedades anônimas, focada na definição de competência e interação entre os órgãos da companhia, resultando na conclusão de que no direito brasileiro, não há uma divisão fixa de competências entre os órgãos e há hierarquia entre tais órgãos, prevalecendo a assembleia geral de acionistas. Nos demais capítulos, o presente trabalho analisa: (a) o conceito de partes, estabelecendo que apenas acionistas podem ser partes em acordo de votos, (b) o objeto, reconhecendo o exercício do direito de voto e o exercício do poder de controle como objetos legítimos, admitindo-se assim a diferenciação entre acordo de comando e acordo de defesa, (c) as delimitações do objeto, demonstrando que interesse social e abuso de poder de controle são dois fortes delineadores do conteúdo dos acordos de voto, e (d) os efeitos dos acordos de voto, especificamente os acordos de defesa e os acordos de comando, vez que podem irradiar efeitos para os órgãos administrativos da companhia. Espera-se que este trabalho possa contribuir com o debate acerca do tema acordo de voto. / This dissertation endeavors an investigation on shareholders agreements set forth by Article 118 of Federal Law N. 6,404/76, more precisely, shareholders agreements that regulates the exercise of voting rights and/or the control over the company. The interest for the subject developed in view of the nonexistence of an agreement on the matter, either by the legal doctrine or the case law. Furthermore, the dissensions were heightened by the modifications Federal Law N. 10,303/01 implemented to Federal Law N. 6,404/76. In this sense, the present study pursues to correctly circumscribe the main concepts regarding voting agreements, through an analysis of Brazilian and foreign legal doctrine. With such purpose, this work starts with an examination of historical characteristics of joint-stock corporations, focusing on the definition of the powers regarding each body of the company, and on the interaction between them, coming to the conclusion that, under Brazilian law, there is no fixed partition of powers between the bodies, but there is hierarchy between them, being the shareholders meeting the prevalent body. Moreover, this dissertation investigates: (a) the concept of parties, concluding that only shareholders can be parties in voting agreements; (b) the object of shareholders agreements, recognizing the exercise of voting rights and the control over the company as lawful objects, acknowledging, therefore, the difference between commanding agreements and defense agreements; (c) the delimitations of the object, demonstrating that social interest and abuse of control over the company are two main aspects that bound the content of voting agreements; and (d) the effects of shareholders agreements, more specifically, the commanding agreements and defense agreements, considering that they may be effective over administrative bodies of the company. This work is expected to contribute with the debate regarding the matter on voting agreements.

O trabalho tem por objetivo a análise do tema da arbitragem societária, entendida aqui como a arbitragem decorrente de cláusula arbitral inserida no ato constitutivo de uma sociedade. Analisa-se, num primeiro momento, a adequação da arbitragem em matéria societária, o que compreende a investigação de suas vantagens e desvantagens em relação à justiça estatal e de algumas consequências da escolha da via arbitral para os sujeitos envolvidos. Num segundo momento, trata-se do cabimento da arbitragem em matéria societária, o que compreende o estudo da arbitrabilidade dos pontos de vista subjetivo e objetivo. A arbitrabilidade subjetiva é tema que envolve a polêmica sobre a vinculação de sócios que não concordem expressamente com a cláusula arbitral inserida mediante deliberação majoritária. Feito isso, o trabalho ruma para temas sensíveis de aplicação da arbitragem societária: (i) a possível instituição de quórum qualificado e direito de recesso ao acionista para a inserção de cláusula compromissória no ato constitutivo de sociedade; (ii) a vinculação dos órgãos sociais e de seus titulares à cláusula arbitral societária; (iii) a confidencialidade; (iv) as questões procedimentais decorrentes da multiplicidade de sujeitos envolvidos; e (v) o julgamento de impasses de natureza negocial pelos árbitros. Ao final, pretende-se verificar se algum desses pontos merece regulação legal. / The work aims to analyze the subject of intra-corporate arbitration, understood here as arbitration derived from arbitration clauses inserted in articles of association of companies. It analyses, at first, the appropriateness of arbitration for corporate disputes, which encompasses investigation about the advantages and disadvantages of arbitration compared to state justice and some consequences of the choice of arbitration for subjects involved. Secondly, investigation focuses in arbitrability (both from a subjective and an objective perspective). From a subjective perspective, investigation concerns the controversy about the possibility of imposing the arbitration clause inserted in articles of incorporation by the majority of the partners or shareholders against the will of those who do not agree expressly with the arbitration clause. Later, the work aims to analyze some sensitive issues concerning the implementation of intra-corporate arbitration: (i) the possible creation of qualified quorum and withdrawal rights for the partners or shareholders that do not agree with the arbitration clause imposed by the majority; (ii) the possibility to impose the arbitration clause against corporate bodies and its members; (iii) confidentiality; (iv) some procedural issues derived from multiple people involved in litigation about the same subject matter; (v) the possibility for arbitrators to judge controversies related to business matters. The final purpose is to determine whether any of these controversial topics should have legal regulation.

This dissertation consists of three papers that examine how aspects of public policy may impact private sector corporate governance. The first two examine the relationship between personal-tax policy and corporate agency costs. The first paper is a theoretical analysis based on an agency model of managerial behavior. A unique element of this paper is that it assumes a discontinuous compensation function, which reflects the occurrence of performance thresholds associated with the dismissal incentive and many common bonus plans. The analysis results in three main findings. First, the relative magnitude of proportional taxation has an indeterminate effect on managerial performance. Second, an increase in tax progressivity is associated with reduced managerial performance and increased agency costs. Third, the inclusion of performance thresholds and compensation discontinuities can cause tax system changes to have surprisingly large impacts on managerial performance. The second paper is an empirical investigation of the relationship between personal-tax progressivity and corporate operating efficiency. The analysis is based on variations in across-state tax policy and utilizes a sample of US-based firms. Using matched-pair testing and regression analysis, evidence is found that is consistent with the hypothesis that increased personal-tax progressivity negatively impacts managerial performance. Together, the analysis contained in the first two papers suggests a need to further examine the relationship between personal taxation and corporate agency costs, an issue that is largely absent from the research literature. The third paper investigates whether variations in state corporate law affect firm value. Previous research in this area generally treats all states other than Delaware as having homogeneous corporate law. I relax this assumption and analyze a large panel sample of US firms. Evidence is found that Delaware firms are worth more, on average, than non-Delaware firms. However, this effect is not consistent across all non-Delaware jurisdictions. The valuation differences are correlated to differences in statutory law. Specifically, corporate law that provides greater entrenchment of management is associated with reduced firm value. The results indicate that corporate law does affect corporate governance. Furthermore, the findings are inconsistent with the “race to the bottom” theory of corporate law. / May 2006