It is the objective of this comparative thesis to analyze how Canadian and German legislators have addressed the compromise between minority shareholder protection and flexibility in the regulation of going private transactions. The structure of this study follows the distinction between indirect and direct-methods that are available to a controlling shareholder who sets out to eliminate minority shareholder participations in order to become the exclusive shareholder of a corporation. In fact, both jurisdictions under consideration provide for a complex regime of corporate and securities law to govern going private transactions. The interplay of corporate and securities law produces a typical regulatory conflict between the goals of shareholders as opposed to investor protection on the one hand, and the purpose of a flexible corporate law regime and efficient capital markets regulation on the other hand. This comparative analysis evidences the respective advantages and disadvantages of the Canadian and German regimes and provides for regulatory prescriptions that result from the comparison.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:LACETR/oai:collectionscanada.gc.ca:QMM.80934 |
| Date | January 2003 |
| Creators | Kreymborg, Dorothea |
| Contributors | Smith, Lionel D. (advisor) |
| Publisher | McGill University |
| Source Sets | Library and Archives Canada ETDs Repository / Centre d'archives des thèses électroniques de Bibliothèque et Archives Canada |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Coverage | Master of Laws (Institute of Comparative Law.) |
| Rights | All items in eScholarship@McGill are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. |
| Relation | alephsysno: 002085466, proquestno: AAIMQ98799, Theses scanned by UMI/ProQuest. |
Page generated in 0.0034 seconds