Esta dissertação analisa os limites e a conveniência da vinculação de administradores a acordo de acionistas. Com a promulgação da lei nº 10.303, de 31 de outubro de 2001, foram incluídos os §§ 8º e 9º, ao art. 118 da lei nº 6.404, de 15 de dezembro de 1976 (LSA), que indisputavelmente passaram a vincular os administradores de companhias aos termos dos acordos de acionistas arquivados em suas sedes. Desde então, inexiste consenso doutrinário e jurisprudencial acerca dos limites de tal vinculação. A dissertação analisa, pois, as principais posições doutrinárias que variam desde a vinculação genérica, até a vinculação relativa. A primeira é capaz de abranger todos os atos da administração; a segunda, por sua vez, limita a possibilidade de vinculação da administração apenas com relação aos atos que não sejam de sua competência privativa previstos em lei ou pelo estatuto e, ainda, preserva o poder (dever) finalístico do administrador, previsto no art. 154 da LSA, de buscar e privilegiar o interesse da companhia. A dissertação tece, ainda, diversos comentários e posicionamentos sobre a conveniência de se vincular administradores. / This dissertation analyses the limits and the convenience of binding administrators to the shareholders\' agreement. With the promulgation of law nº 10,303, of October 31, 2001, §§ 8º and 9º were included to the article 118 of law nº 6,404, of December 15, 1976 (LSA), which indisputably began to bind companies administrators to the terms of the shareholder agreements filed in their headquarters. Since then, there is no consensus in the doctrine or the precedents about the limits of such binding situation. The dissertation analyses, thus, the main doctrinal positions ranging from the generic binding form until the relative one. The first is able to cover all acts of the administration; the second, on it turn, limits the possibility of binding the administration only with respect to acts that are not part of its competence provided for by law or by companies by-laws, and also preserves the finalistic power (duty) of the administrator provided for in article 154 of the LSA, of pursuing and giving priority to the companies interest. The dissertation also weaves several commentaries and positions on the desirability to bind administrators.

Dentre os atuais desafios do direito societário brasileiro, a estrutura da propriedade acionária das sociedades por ações de capital aberto e a identificação daqueles que as comandam merecem destaque. O aquecimento das transações realizadas via mercado de capitais e a consolidação dos segmentos especiais de governança corporativa no Brasil resultaram no chamado fenômeno de dispersão acionária, que evidenciou certa ruptura na tradicional estrutura de propriedade acionária exclusivamente concentrada, até então predominante nas companhias brasileiras. Diante desse cenário contrastante, de mudanças no perfil do poder de controle sobre as companhias brasileiras, o presente trabalho apresentará em seu capítulo terceiro, após breve análise das estruturas de capital identificadas em diferentes economias e de retrospectiva sobre a propriedade acionária das companhias brasileiras (a serem apresentadas em seu segundo capítulo), extensa pesquisa empírica realizada com o propósito de identificar a atual estrutura de propriedade acionária predominante entre as companhias brasileiras listadas no segmento especial do Novo Mercado da BMF&BOVESPA (Novo Mercado), e com o objetivo de averiguar a existência do chamado controle societário minoritário entre tais companhias, conforme detalhado nos apêndices desta dissertação. Referida pesquisa empírica representa, ainda, rico processamento da base de dados e informações divulgadas à Comissão de Valores Mobiliários (CVM) pelas companhias listadas no Novo Mercado, e serve de base para a avaliação da necessidade de eventuais mudanças nos conceitos adotados pelo Direito Societário pátrio, tendo em vista entendimento divergente identificado na doutrina e em julgados da CVM no âmbito da possibilidade de existência de um controle societário exercido por acionista ou grupo de acionistas não detentores da maioria do capital social votante, conforme detalhado no quarto capítulo deste estudo. Por fim, serão apresentadas, no quinto e último capítulo, as considerações finais à análise proposta, com destaque para as principais conclusões obtidas na elaboração dos capítulos terceiro e quarto descritos acima, dentre elas a existência do controle societário interno não majoritário (controle minoritário) entre companhias listadas no Novo Mercado, bem como os reflexos dessa constatação no âmbito da prática do Direito Societário. / Among the current challenges of the Brazilian Corporate Law, the structure of the capital ownership of the corporations and the identification of those who exercises control over it remains an important aspect to be taken into consideration when analyzing the main aspects of the Brazilian capital market. The heat up of the transactions carried out through the capital market, and the consolidation of the special corporate governance segments in Brazil resulted in the so called phenomenon of the dispersed ownership, which revealed a rupture from the traditional structure of extremely concentrated ownership, that was prevailing until now among the Brazilian corporations. Given such contrasting scenario of changes in the profile of corporate power over Brazilian corporations, these thesis, after describing, over its first two chapters, the structures of capital ownership existent in different economies and providing a retrospective on the capital ownership of Brazilian corporations, presents, in its third chapter, an extensive empirical research performed with the purposes of identifying the current structure of capital ownership prevailing among the Brazilian companies listed in the Novo Mercado, special segment of the Brazilian Exchange BMF&BOVESPA (the New Market), as well as ascertaining the existence of minority corporate control among such companies, as detailed in the appendixes hereto. The referred empirical research presents, furthermore, detailed data processing in connection with the information disclosed by such companies to the Brazilian Stock Exchange Commission, the Comissão de Valores Mobiliários (CVM), and is also used as basis for reviewing the need of eventual changes in the concepts embodied by the Brazilian Corporate Law, in view of the divergent understanding identified in the Brazilian doctrine and judgments issued by the CVM in connection with the existence of a corporate control exercised by a shareholder or group of shareholders owner of shareholding not representative of the majority of the voting capital stock, as detailed in the fourth chapter of these thesis. Finally, the fifth and last chapter of these study presents the final considerations in connection with the review proposed hereto, highlighting the main conclusions obtained through the elaboration of the third and fourth chapters described above, among them the existence of a not majority internal control (minority control) in companies listed in the New Market, as well as the effects of such conclusion in the light of the practice of corporate law.

Submitted by Alexandra Cisotto Belline (alexandrabelline@yahoo.com.br) on 2016-06-14T19:42:18Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertação Alexandra Versão Entregue 14 06 2016.pdf: 8341218 bytes, checksum: 387a098a147e1b777b282c181b5bbe1c (MD5) / Rejected by Joana Martorini (joana.martorini@fgv.br), reason: Seu trabalho foi rejeitado devendo fazer alterações on 2016-06-14T20:01:27Z (GMT) / Submitted by Alexandra Cisotto Belline (alexandrabelline@yahoo.com.br) on 2016-06-15T19:08:39Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertação Alexandra Versão Entregue 14 06 2016.pdf: 8341218 bytes, checksum: 387a098a147e1b777b282c181b5bbe1c (MD5) / Rejected by Joana Martorini (joana.martorini@fgv.br), reason: Trabalho rejeitado. on 2016-06-15T19:24:58Z (GMT) / Submitted by Alexandra Cisotto Belline (alexandrabelline@yahoo.com.br) on 2016-06-15T21:22:31Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertação Alexandra Versão Entregue 15 06 2016.pdf: 8349846 bytes, checksum: 06c7baecfb96c1fde4d0888192b79639 (MD5) / Rejected by Renata de Souza Nascimento (renata.souza@fgv.br), reason: Trabalho rejeitado. Arrumar a numeração das páginas, conforme informado por telefone. Att. on 2016-06-15T21:51:14Z (GMT) / Submitted by Alexandra Cisotto Belline (alexandrabelline@yahoo.com.br) on 2016-06-15T22:46:58Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertação Alexandra Versão Entregue 15 06 2016 V2.pdf: 8347795 bytes, checksum: 78b9bb6d1a74cee3c4b50a58f24ea70e (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Renata de Souza Nascimento (renata.souza@fgv.br) on 2016-06-15T22:58:02Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertação Alexandra Versão Entregue 15 06 2016 V2.pdf: 8347795 bytes, checksum: 78b9bb6d1a74cee3c4b50a58f24ea70e (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-06-16T12:16:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertação Alexandra Versão Entregue 15 06 2016 V2.pdf: 8347795 bytes, checksum: 78b9bb6d1a74cee3c4b50a58f24ea70e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-05-09 / Since the mid-1990s the Brazilian business environment has experienced a significant increase in the sophistication of modeling corporate structures for large enterprises, a type of knowledge, however, mostly restricted to participants in these ventures and its legal and financial counsel. In the case of the corporate structure of Brazil Telecom, however, it was possible to access all documents and information in order to study this structure, due to the massive litigation involving this company for almost ten years , where most part of the documents analyzed in this dissertation were found. This material is precious because the case of Brazil Telecom - known as one of the major in Brazilian corporate law - has a very important peculiarity: the group was managed by a minority shareholder, Opportunity group, which exercised power control during those ten years, despite its diminished equity interest and strong opposition suffered from major shareholders for most of the time in which that power was exercised. The aim of this study is to reveal the legal techniques that allowed the exercise of this power, as well as to seek to understand why, in spite of so much opposition from other shareholders and the massive litigation, it took years for the Opportunity to be definitely removed from the administration and the exercise of controlling power of Brazil Telecom. / Desde meados dos anos 1990 o ambiente de negócios brasileiro tem passado por um relevante incremento na sofisticação da modelagem de estruturas societárias para grandes empreendimentos, um tipo de conhecimento que, porém, fica na maior parte restrito aos participantes desses empreendimentos e seus assessores jurídicos e financeiros. No caso da estruturação societária da Brasil Telecom, entretanto, foi possível ter acesso a todos os documentos e informações necessários ao estudo dessa estrutura, devido à enorme quantidade de litígios judiciais em que essa companhia esteve envolvida por quase dez anos, nos quais se pode obter a maior parte dos documentos analisados neste trabalho. Esse material é precioso, pois o caso da Brasil Telecom, conhecido como um dos maiores do direito societário brasileiro, tem uma peculiaridade muito importante: o grupo era gerido por um acionista minoritário, o grupo Opportunity, que exerceu poder de controle durante esses dez anos, apesar de sua diminuta participação societária e da forte oposição que sofreu dos acionistas majoritários por quase todo o tempo em que exerceu esse poder. O objetivo desse trabalho é revelar as técnicas jurídicas que permitiram o exercício desse poder, bem como buscar entender por que, apesar de tanta oposição dos demais acionistas e da enorme litigiosidade, anos transcorreram até que o Opportunity fosse definitivamente afastado da administração e do exercício do poder de controle da Brasil Telecom.

Submitted by Cristiane Oliveira (cristiane.oliveira@fgv.br) on 2011-06-13T16:04:48Z No. of bitstreams: 1 61080200037.pdf: 2311848 bytes, checksum: fbf28a6d46c2c0ab74e653cc55b05635 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Vera Lúcia Mourão(vera.mourao@fgv.br) on 2011-06-13T16:08:55Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 61080200037.pdf: 2311848 bytes, checksum: fbf28a6d46c2c0ab74e653cc55b05635 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Vera Lúcia Mourão(vera.mourao@fgv.br) on 2011-06-13T16:10:14Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 61080200037.pdf: 2311848 bytes, checksum: fbf28a6d46c2c0ab74e653cc55b05635 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2011-06-13T17:51:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 61080200037.pdf: 2311848 bytes, checksum: fbf28a6d46c2c0ab74e653cc55b05635 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-08-30 / Esta dissertação analisa o controle societário nas companhias com investimentos de fundos de private equity e venture capital (PE/VC). Lerner e Schoar argumentam que os fundos de PE/VC assumem o controle através da participação acionária majoritária em países do civil law, como o Brasil, em virtude dos baixos índices de proteção aos investidores. Este trabalho investiga a aplicabilidade dessa hipótese nas companhias com investimento de fundos de PE/VC que realizaram a abertura de capital entre os anos de 2004 a 2008. Neste período, 38 companhias com investimento de fundos de PE/VC ingressaram no Novo Mercado da BM&FBovespa. Algumas companhias do Novo Mercado possuem uma estrutura de propriedade mais dispersa e a ausência de um controlador definido. Nessas companhias, acionistas vinculam os seus direitos de voto em um acordo de acionistas para obtenção de mais de 50% do capital votante e para o exercício do controle da sociedade. O acordo de acionistas, portanto, serve como um substituto à participação majoritária em algumas companhias do Novo Mercado. Desta forma, este trabalho analisa a hipótese de que o acordo de acionistas serve como substituto à participação acionária nas companhias com investimentos de fundos de PE/VC, regulando um controle compartilhado. / This research analyzes the corporate control in private equity and venture capital fund (PE/VC) backed companies. Lerner and Schoar argue that PE/VC funds take control over the majority stake in civil law countries, such as Brazil, because of low rates protection for investors. This work investigates the applicability of this assumption in companies with PE/VC investment funds that made an IPO in BM&FBovespa between the years 2004 to 2008. During this period, 38 PE/VC backed companies in the Novo Mercado have a more dispersed ownership structure and the absence of a controlling shareholder. In these companies, investors bind their voting rights in shareholders agreements works as a substitute for a majority stake in some companies in Novo Mercado. This study analyses the assumption that shareholders’ agreement works as a substitute for majority ownership in PE/VC backed companies regulating a joint control.

Dentre os atuais desafios do direito societário brasileiro, a estrutura da propriedade acionária das sociedades por ações de capital aberto e a identificação daqueles que as comandam merecem destaque. O aquecimento das transações realizadas via mercado de capitais e a consolidação dos segmentos especiais de governança corporativa no Brasil resultaram no chamado fenômeno de dispersão acionária, que evidenciou certa ruptura na tradicional estrutura de propriedade acionária exclusivamente concentrada, até então predominante nas companhias brasileiras. Diante desse cenário contrastante, de mudanças no perfil do poder de controle sobre as companhias brasileiras, o presente trabalho apresentará em seu capítulo terceiro, após breve análise das estruturas de capital identificadas em diferentes economias e de retrospectiva sobre a propriedade acionária das companhias brasileiras (a serem apresentadas em seu segundo capítulo), extensa pesquisa empírica realizada com o propósito de identificar a atual estrutura de propriedade acionária predominante entre as companhias brasileiras listadas no segmento especial do Novo Mercado da BMF&BOVESPA (Novo Mercado), e com o objetivo de averiguar a existência do chamado controle societário minoritário entre tais companhias, conforme detalhado nos apêndices desta dissertação. Referida pesquisa empírica representa, ainda, rico processamento da base de dados e informações divulgadas à Comissão de Valores Mobiliários (CVM) pelas companhias listadas no Novo Mercado, e serve de base para a avaliação da necessidade de eventuais mudanças nos conceitos adotados pelo Direito Societário pátrio, tendo em vista entendimento divergente identificado na doutrina e em julgados da CVM no âmbito da possibilidade de existência de um controle societário exercido por acionista ou grupo de acionistas não detentores da maioria do capital social votante, conforme detalhado no quarto capítulo deste estudo. Por fim, serão apresentadas, no quinto e último capítulo, as considerações finais à análise proposta, com destaque para as principais conclusões obtidas na elaboração dos capítulos terceiro e quarto descritos acima, dentre elas a existência do controle societário interno não majoritário (controle minoritário) entre companhias listadas no Novo Mercado, bem como os reflexos dessa constatação no âmbito da prática do Direito Societário. / Among the current challenges of the Brazilian Corporate Law, the structure of the capital ownership of the corporations and the identification of those who exercises control over it remains an important aspect to be taken into consideration when analyzing the main aspects of the Brazilian capital market. The heat up of the transactions carried out through the capital market, and the consolidation of the special corporate governance segments in Brazil resulted in the so called phenomenon of the dispersed ownership, which revealed a rupture from the traditional structure of extremely concentrated ownership, that was prevailing until now among the Brazilian corporations. Given such contrasting scenario of changes in the profile of corporate power over Brazilian corporations, these thesis, after describing, over its first two chapters, the structures of capital ownership existent in different economies and providing a retrospective on the capital ownership of Brazilian corporations, presents, in its third chapter, an extensive empirical research performed with the purposes of identifying the current structure of capital ownership prevailing among the Brazilian companies listed in the Novo Mercado, special segment of the Brazilian Exchange BMF&BOVESPA (the New Market), as well as ascertaining the existence of minority corporate control among such companies, as detailed in the appendixes hereto. The referred empirical research presents, furthermore, detailed data processing in connection with the information disclosed by such companies to the Brazilian Stock Exchange Commission, the Comissão de Valores Mobiliários (CVM), and is also used as basis for reviewing the need of eventual changes in the concepts embodied by the Brazilian Corporate Law, in view of the divergent understanding identified in the Brazilian doctrine and judgments issued by the CVM in connection with the existence of a corporate control exercised by a shareholder or group of shareholders owner of shareholding not representative of the majority of the voting capital stock, as detailed in the fourth chapter of these thesis. Finally, the fifth and last chapter of these study presents the final considerations in connection with the review proposed hereto, highlighting the main conclusions obtained through the elaboration of the third and fourth chapters described above, among them the existence of a not majority internal control (minority control) in companies listed in the New Market, as well as the effects of such conclusion in the light of the practice of corporate law.

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.

Bestämmelsen om tvångsinlösen i 22 kap. 1 § ABL är tvingande, vilket innebär att avsteg från vad som föreskrivs inte får göras genom bolagsordningen. Mot bakgrund av Högsta domstolens avgörande i NJA 2011 s. 429, synes bestämmelsens tvingande natur vara än mer vidsträckt. I förevarande fall ansågs nämligen ett aktieägaravtal, varigenom en majoritetsägare avstått från sin rätt att påkalla tvångsinlösen, sakna aktiebolagsrättslig relevans. Domstolen framhöll emellertid att sådana aktieägaravtal som huvudregel binder parterna. Författarna är av uppfattningen att blotta förekomsten av tvångsinlöseninstitutet utgör en inskränkning av principen om avtalsfrihet. Därutöver innebär Högsta domstolens avgörande att den välgrundade principen inskränks ytterligare. I förevarande uppsats utreds huruvida den sistnämnda inskränkningen är motiverad. Därutöver utreds även hur ett eventuellt avtalsbrott och en därtill inträdande skadeståndsskyldighet förhåller sig till det faktum att avtalsvillkoret saknar aktiebolagsrättslig relevans. Inledningsvis anser författarna att inskränkningen av avtalsfriheten som följer av NJA 2011 s. 429 är motiverad. Vidare har författarna konstaterat att skadeståndsskyldighet kan aktualiseras de lege lata eftersom parterna torde vara obligationsrättsligt bundna mot bakgrund av Högsta domstolens uttalande i NJA 2011 s. 429. Yttermera är författarna av uppfattningen att ett föreliggande skadeståndsansvar inte kan begränsas genom tillämpning av adekvansläran eller normskyddsläran. De lege ferenda anser författarna att ett aktieägaravtal som inskränker tvångsinlösenrätten inte bör tillerkännas obligationsrättslig verkan. Detta främst mot bakgrund av att det är en orimlig följd att ett avtal som inte kan göras gällande gentemot bolaget trots allt kan föranleda obligationsrättslig bundenhet och skadeståndsansvar. / The provision in chapter 22. 1 § of the Swedish companies act regarding compulsory purchases and sales of shares is imperative, meaning that derogations from the provision not is allowed through a company’s articles of association. The imperative nature of the provision has been further strengthened through the Swedish Supreme Court ruling NJA 2011 s. 429. In the mentioned case, a shareholders’ agreement in which a party has waived its right to claim a compulsory purchase, was found to lack affect in relation to the company. However, the court stressed that shareholders’ agreements, in principle, are valid and enforceable between the contractual parties, i.e. the shareholders. The authors’ opinion is that the mere existence of compulsory purchases and sales of shares constitute an infringement of the freedom of contract. Moreover, the mentioned court ruling entails an extension of the already existing infringement of this freedom. This thesis examines whether this, later infringement, is motivated. Furthermore, this thesis examines how a breach of a shareholders’ agreement – and liability to pay damages – relates to the fact that the contractual term that has been breached lacks affect toward the company.  According to the authors, the infringement of the freedom of contract derived from the mentioned court ruling is motivated. Furthermore, the authors have concluded that liability to pay damages may arise de lege lata, due to the fact that the contractual parties ought to be bound by the shareholders’ agreement according to the mentioned court ruling. In the authors’ opinion, the methods used to limit liability are not capable of doing so in this case. The authors suggest, de lege ferenda, that a term of a shareholder’s agreement where a party refrains from his right to claim a compulsory purchase or sales of shares not shall be binding between the parties.

La trascendencia práctica del tema del régimen jurídico de las joint ventures es indudable. En los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea, y más especialmente en España, las joint ventures remiten a una idea de mayor eficiencia económica, permitiendo a las empresas formar alianzas entre ellas, y así mejorar su competitividad, adaptando sus estructuras a las dimensiones crecientes de los mercados europeos y mundiales.Las joint ventures no están reguladas como tales en ninguna legislación nacional europea. El derecho comunitario se concentra por su parte en el análisis de los efectos de estas operaciones sobre la competencia. Las joint ventures adquieren en la práctica, únicamente, su contenido jurídico.Este estudio tiene por objetivo presentar un análisis a la vez teórico y práctico del régimen jurídico de las joint ventures, intentando definir el "valor añadido" del trabajo del jurista profesional cuando interviene en la creación y el funcionamiento de las joint ventures. La adopción de esta óptica funcionalista permite integrar el análisis de los diversos aspectos jurídicos de las joint ventures, sus estructuras contractuales y societarias así como su tratamiento en derecho de la competencia, que se abordan tradicionalmente en estudios separados, e insistir en la interelación existente entre las diversas ramas del derecho afectadas. Este estudio se concentra esencialmente en las cuestiones planteadas por las joint ventures en el ámbito del derecho de las obligaciones y del derecho societario.El jurista profesional desempeña, en primer lugar, una función de naturaleza organizativa, creando un conjunto de reglas obligatorias (reglas jurídicas) para todas las empresas participantes en la operación, de acuerdo con sus intereses estratégicos. El resultado puede ser, por ejemplo, la conclusión de un simple contrato, la constitución de una AEIE o la de una sociedad de capital. La complejidad de la organización jurídica de la joint venture impide estudiar de manera separada, como dos piezas aisladas, el llamado acuerdo de base de la joint venture por un lado, y la sociedad eventualmente constituida, la llamada filial común, por otro. El hecho de no entender la filial común como parte de un todo unitario y más complejo no permite describir correctamente las especialidades del régimen aplicable a dicha sociedad frente a sociedades constituidas en otros contextos económicos. La organización compleja de las joint ventures se diferencia de otros negocios jurídicos complejos por razón de su finalidad económica específica, la de establecer una alianza entre empresas. Tal como indica el derecho comunitario de la competencia, la joint venture es una operación en la que: (i) participan dos o más empresas independientemente activas en el mercado; (ii) se agrupan recursos necesarios al desarrollo de una actividad económica común en el seno eventualmente, pero no obligatoriamente, de una entidad separada (la llamada empresa común"); (iii) las empresas participantes ejercen un control conjunto sobre dicha actividad económica común. Estos tres elementos forman el núcleo de la definición de la joint venture en derecho.La cuestión de la validez y eficacia jurídica de los pactos presentes en el contrato complejo de joint venture, cuando implica la existencia de una sociedad de capital, es la que más dificultades plantea. El problema respecto a la joint venture, como respecto a muchos otros contratos complejos, es organizar un discurso sobre el uso de la libertad y sus consecuencias en el ámbito del derecho de sociedades.Mientras el jurista profesional organiza la joint venture, atrae también la atención del legislador sobre las necesidades jurídicas de las empresas que deciden "aliarse" en el seno de una joint venture. Los pactos presentes en los contratos complejos de joint venture no dependen únicamente del contenido del derecho aplicable a la sociedad "filial común" por ejemplo, sino también de la creatividad de los juristas profesionales. Las finalidades a cubrir por el contrato lo serán en regla general mediante combinaciones originales y complejas de mecanismos jurídicos, demostrándose una vez más el papel relevante de la práctica en la formación del derecho. Como consecuencia, puede observarse una tendencia a la flexibilización del derecho aplicable a las sociedades de capital, sobre todo en los países europeos continentales. Esta adaptación del derecho a la realidad práctica se observa también, y de manera significativa, en otras ramas del derecho, como en derecho de la competencia donde el legislador intenta introducir un tratamiento cada vez más pragmático de los efectos producidos por las joint ventures sobre los mercados. El análisis de la organización jurídica de las joint ventures en la práctica demuestra, sin embargo, la falta de utilidad y de oportunidad de una ordenación legal de la joint venture como tal en Europa. Como en el caso de la organización de la empresa, basta con que los operadores "candidatos" a la alianza encuentren en el derecho positivo los legal tools, o instrumentos jurídicos, adaptados a los objetivos económicos legítimos que persiguen ( por ejemplo, diversas formas sociales, la AIE, la UTE, la cuenta en participación etc), y sobre la base de los cuales puedan conservar y reforzar el sentimiento de confianza que necesitan tener en la operación y en su "aliado" para alcanzar con éxito estos objetivos. / This study provides a comprehensive analysis of both practical and theoretical legal issues raised by joint ventures in Europe. In the European Union member states and especially in Spain, joint ventures are viewed as a high efficient strategic operation - allowing alliances between firms, which may improve their competitiveness and adapt them to the growing dimensions of European markets and to the new global economy. Joint ventures are not organised as such by any statute law in Europe. European law focuses on the analysis of the effects they may produce on competition. Joint ventures obtain a legal content only in practice.The aim of this study is to define the "added value" of the practical work of lawyers, when they take part in processes of creation of joint ventures. This question allows to integrate the analysis of different legal aspects of joint ventures - their contractual and corporate structure as well as their legal treatment under competition law - which are traditionally treated in separate studies, and to point out the existence of on-going interfaces between them. This study focuses essentially on the contractual and corporate aspects of joint ventures. Practitioners set up, first of all, mechanisms which are compulsory - i.e. legal rules - for the firms involved in the operation according to their strategic interests. The result may be, for instance, the creation of a mere "contractual joint venture", of an European Economic Interest Grouping, or the incorporation of a "joint venture company". The complexity of the joint venture legal organisation prevents from studying separately the so-called "joint venture agreement" on which is based the operation, and the company which may be incorporated within it. The joint venture company is only a part of a more complex ensemble, which needs to be understood as such in order to be correctly analysed.The complex legal organisation of joint ventures differs from any other complex legal organisations because of its specific purpose, ie. establish a strategic alliance between firms. It aims to organise an operation in which: (i) participate two or more firms independently active on the market; (ii) are gathered the resources necessary to carry out a common business activity, possibly but not obligatory within a separate entity; and (iii) the participating firms jointly control the common business activity. Those three features are at the basis of the legal definition of joint ventures.The question of the legal validity and efficiency of the terms and conditions present in incorporated joint venture agreements is the more problematic one for the practitioners. The main difficulty in relation with joint ventures like in relation with many other complex agreements is to determine the limits of use of contractual freedom in company law.While organising the operation, the practitioners are also drawing the attention of the legislator on the legal needs of the firms willing to enter into alliances. The terms and conditions present in joint venture agreements depend not only on the content of the statute law applicable to the joint venture company for example, but also on the creative skills of the practitioners. The joint venture agreement needs to cover different purposes generally through original and complex combinations of legal mechanisms, proving once again the relevant role of practice in the generation of law.As a result, it is possible to observe a certain "flexibilization" of the rules in company law, especially in continental Europe. This new tendency develops in parallel with the movement observed in competition law towards a more realistic and pragmatic analysis of joint venture effects on the markets.The analysis of the legal organisations of joint ventures existing in practice demonstrates however the lack of necessity for a statutory regulation of this (strategic) operation in Europe. Like in the case of the organisation of a firm, the economic players willing to enter into strategic alliances only need to find in statute law different "legal tools" which may adapt their legitimate economic interests - such as different company forms, the Economic Interest Grouping, the partnership - and on the basis of which they can conserve and reinforce the confidence they need to have in their partner and in the operation in order to achieve successfully their purposes.