Spelling suggestions: "subject:"interindividual"" "subject:"intraindividual""
31 |
Le pacte d'actionnaires dans l'environnement sociétaireLeroy, Caroline 14 June 2010 (has links)
Le pacte d’actionnaires se place dans une forme de dépendance unilatérale au contrat de société qui n’est pas sans rappeler le rapport juridique d’accessoire à principal.En effet, s’il est fondamentalement distinct du contrat de société qu’il complète, tout pacte conclu par certains actionnaires, en dehors des statuts, afin d’organiser leurs relations interindividuelles d’actionnaires, trouve nécessairement sa matière et puise sa raison d’être dans le pacte social. Ainsi, la dépendance du pacte au contrat de société se manifeste-t-elle, de la manière la plus évidente, par la caducité qu’entraîne pour le pacte l’arrivée du terme du contrat de société ou la perte de la qualité d’actionnaire d’un partenaire.Dès lors, par analogie avec la règle selon laquelle l’accessoire a vocation à suivre le sort du principal, cette dimension d’accessoire du contrat de société justifie que le pacte subisse l’influence du cadre juridique auquel le contrat de société est lui-même soumis, à savoir le droit des sociétés et, en particulier, l’ordre public sociétaire.Cette dépendance au contrat de société, par essence commune à tous les pactes d’actionnaires en raison de leur objet matériel et de leur cause, est à géométrie variable. Elle repose en effet sur divers facteurs de rattachement au contrat de société que sont l’exercice du droit de vote, la détention des actions ou la qualité d’actionnaire des partenaires, lesquels impriment, selon qu’ils s’immiscent plus ou moins profondément dans le fondement, la structure ou encore le fonctionnement de la société, différents degrés de dépendance dans la relation pacte - contrat de société.Malgré l’hétérogénéité du régime des pactes d’actionnaires, il est alors possible de dégager,à l’aune de cette dimension d’accessoire, une tendance fondamentale qui anime, en droit positif, la jurisprudence relative aux pactes. Cette ligne directrice réside dans la variabilité du degré d’emprise des règles qui encadrent le contrat de société sur le régime des pactes d’actionnaires.La jurisprudence se révèle être, en effet, d’une manière générale et par-delà la casuistique, en cohérence avec cette influence proportionnelle de l’environnement sociétaire à l’intensité du degré de dépendance que présente chaque type de pacte en fonction du facteur qui le rattache au contrat de société. Les pactes caractérisés par une dépendance marquée au contrat de société bénéficient ainsi d’une marge de liberté à la mesure de celle dont bénéficie le contrat de société pour l’aménagement de l’exercice du droit de vote ou de la perte de la qualité d’actionnaire. Au contraire, les pactes caractérisés par une dépendance modérée au contrat de société, qui organisent des cessions ou des acquisitions d’actions,sont plus largement libérés des contraintes auxquelles est soumis le contrat de société au regard du principe de libre négociabilité des actions. Quant à l’influence sur les pactes de certains autres principes d’ordre public sociétaire, tels que la prohibition des clauses léonines ou l’expertise de l’article 1843-4 du Code civil, elle demeure incertaine en droit positif. Toutefois, la jurisprudence tend à reconnaître le particularisme de ces règles et à leur retirer, en conséquence, tout caractère impératif en dehors du cadre des relations entretenues collectivement par les actionnaires avec la société. / Shareholders’ agreement falls into a form of unilateral dependence to the companyagreement that is reminiscent of the legal relationship between the incidental and itsprincipal.Indeed, although it is fundamentally separate from the company agreement, which itsupplements, any agreement concluded by certain shareholders apart from the articles ofassociation, in order to organise their inter-individual shareholders relationships, is,nevertheless, necessarily based on and permitted by the company agreement. Thus, thecontractual dependency of the shareholders’ agreement to the company agreementmanifests itself, in the most obvious way, through the obsoleteness of the shareholders’agreement caused by the termination of the company agreement or by the loss ofshareholder status by a partner.Therefore, by analogy with the rule according to which the incidental is inclined to yield to theprincipal, such kinship to the quality of accessory to the company agreement justifies the factthat the shareholders’ agreement would be under the influence of the legal framework towhich the company’s memorandum and articles of association are submitted, that is to saycorporate law and, in particular, corporate law and order.This dependence to the company agreement, which is in essence common to allshareholders’ agreements due to their material object and cause, turns out to be flexible. Itrests indeed on different connecting factors to the company agreement, such as using thevoting right, shareholding or shareholder status of partners, which imprint, according to howdeep they work into the company foundation, structure or functioning, different degrees ofdependence in the relationship between the shareholders’ agreement and the companyagreement.In spite of the heterogenic regime of the shareholders’ agreements, it is possible to outline, inrespect to this type of accessory status to the company agreement, a crucial tendency thatleads, in positive law, agreements-related case law. This guideline lies in the variability of thehold on shareholders’ agreements regime by the rules that frame the company’smemorandum and articles of association.Indeed, case law proves to be, generally speaking and beyond casuistry, consistentwith this proportional influence of the company environment to the degree of dependenceeach type of shareholders’ agreement is subject to, according to the factor connecting it tothe company agreement. The shareholders’ agreements that show a strong dependence tothe company agreement are given a leeway commensurate with the one the company’smemorandum and articles of association benefit from regarding voting right or loss ofshareholder status arrangements. By contrast, the moderately dependant shareholders’agreements, organising transfer or acquisition of shares, are more widely released from therestrictions that govern the company’s articles of association regarding the principle of freetransferability of shares. Furthermore, the influence on shareholders’ agreements of someother principles of corporate law and order, such as the leonine clause prohibition or theexpertise of Article 1843-4 of the French Civil Code, remain uncertain in positive law.However, case law tends to recognize the distinctive identity of these rules and,consequently, to clear them from any imperative property beyond the frame of therelationships that the shareholders have collectively with the company.
|
32 |
Action in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: an Enactive Psycho-phenomenological and Semiotic Analysis of Thirty New Zealand Women's Experiences of Suffering and RecoveryHart, M J Alexandra January 2010 (has links)
This research into Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) presents the results of 60 first-person psycho-phenomenological interviews with 30 New Zealand women. The participants were recruited from the Canterbury and Wellington regions, 10 had recovered. Taking a non-dual, non-reductive embodied approach, the phenomenological data was analysed semiotically, using a graph-theoretical cluster analysis to elucidate the large number of resulting categories, and interpreted through the enactive approach to cognitive science.
The initial result of the analysis is a comprehensive exploration of the experience of CFS which develops subject-specific categories of experience and explores the relation of the illness to universal categories of experience, including self, ‘energy’, action, and being-able-to-do.
Transformations of the self surrounding being-able-to-do and not-being-able-to-do were shown to elucidate the illness process.
It is proposed that the concept ‘energy’ in the participants’ discourse is equivalent to the Mahayana Buddhist concept of ‘contact’. This characterises CFS as a breakdown of contact. Narrative content from the recovered interviewees reflects a reestablishment of contact.
The hypothesis that CFS is a disorder of action is investigated in detail.
A general model for the phenomenology and functional architecture of action is proposed. This model is a recursive loop involving felt meaning, contact, action, and perception and appears to be phenomenologically supported.
It is proposed that the CFS illness process is a dynamical decompensation of the subject’s action loop caused by a breakdown in the process of contact.
On this basis, a new interpretation of neurological findings in relation to CFS becomes possible. A neurological phenomenon that correlates with the illness and involves a brain region that has a similar structure to the action model’s recursive loop is identified in previous research results and compared with the action model and the results of this research. This correspondence may identify the brain regions involved in the illness process, which may provide an objective diagnostic test for the condition and approaches to treatment.
The implications of this model for cognitive science and CFS should be investigated through neurophenomenological research since the model stands to shed considerable light on the nature of consciousness, contact and agency.
Phenomenologically based treatments are proposed, along with suggestions for future research on CFS. The research may clarify the diagnostic criteria for CFS and guide management and treatment programmes, particularly multidimensional and interdisciplinary approaches.
Category theory is proposed as a foundation for a mathematisation of phenomenology.
|
Page generated in 0.0657 seconds