Javascript must be enabled to continue!
European Takeover Law: The Case for a Neutral Approach
View through CrossRef
This article argues that in revising the Takeover Bid Directive, EU policymakers should adopt a neutral approach toward takeovers, i.e. enact rules that neither hamper nor promote them. The rationale behind this approach is that takeovers can be both value-creating and value-decreasing and there is no way to tell ex ante which kind they are. Unfortunately, takeover rules cannot be crafted so as to hinder all the bad takeovers while at the same time promoting the good ones. Further, contestability of control is not cost-free, because it has a negative impact on managers' and block-holders' incentives to make firm-specific investments of human capital, which in turn affects firm value. It is thus argued that individual companies should be able to decide how contestable their control should be. After showing that the current EU legal framework for takeovers overall hinders takeover activity in the EU, the paper identifies three rationales for a takeover-neutral intervention of the EU in the area of takeover regulation (pre-emption of "takeover-hostile," protectionist national regulations, opt-out rules protecting shareholders vis-à-vis managers' and dominant shareholders' opportunism in takeover contexts, and menu rules helping individual companies define their degree of control contestability) and provides examples of rules that may respond to such rationales.
Title: European Takeover Law: The Case for a Neutral Approach
Description:
This article argues that in revising the Takeover Bid Directive, EU policymakers should adopt a neutral approach toward takeovers, i.
e.
enact rules that neither hamper nor promote them.
The rationale behind this approach is that takeovers can be both value-creating and value-decreasing and there is no way to tell ex ante which kind they are.
Unfortunately, takeover rules cannot be crafted so as to hinder all the bad takeovers while at the same time promoting the good ones.
Further, contestability of control is not cost-free, because it has a negative impact on managers' and block-holders' incentives to make firm-specific investments of human capital, which in turn affects firm value.
It is thus argued that individual companies should be able to decide how contestable their control should be.
After showing that the current EU legal framework for takeovers overall hinders takeover activity in the EU, the paper identifies three rationales for a takeover-neutral intervention of the EU in the area of takeover regulation (pre-emption of "takeover-hostile," protectionist national regulations, opt-out rules protecting shareholders vis-à-vis managers' and dominant shareholders' opportunism in takeover contexts, and menu rules helping individual companies define their degree of control contestability) and provides examples of rules that may respond to such rationales.
Related Results
Hydatid Disease of The Brain Parenchyma: A Systematic Review
Hydatid Disease of The Brain Parenchyma: A Systematic Review
Abstarct
Introduction
Isolated brain hydatid disease (BHD) is an extremely rare form of echinococcosis. A prompt and timely diagnosis is a crucial step in disease management. This ...
Autonomy on Trial
Autonomy on Trial
Photo by CHUTTERSNAP on Unsplash
Abstract
This paper critically examines how US bioethics and health law conceptualize patient autonomy, contrasting the rights-based, individualist...
Does the market for corporate control influence executive risk-taking incentives? Evidence from takeover vulnerability
Does the market for corporate control influence executive risk-taking incentives? Evidence from takeover vulnerability
Purpose
This study aims to investigate the role of the market for corporate control as an external governance mechanism and its effect on executive risk-taking incentives. Managers...
Breast Carcinoma within Fibroadenoma: A Systematic Review
Breast Carcinoma within Fibroadenoma: A Systematic Review
Abstract
Introduction
Fibroadenoma is the most common benign breast lesion; however, it carries a potential risk of malignant transformation. This systematic review provides an ove...
Re Application by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland); Reference by Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland Pursuant to Paragraph 33 of Schedule 10 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998 (Abortion) (Northern Ireland)
Re Application by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland); Reference by Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland Pursuant to Paragraph 33 of Schedule 10 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998 (Abortion) (Northern Ireland)
531Human rights — Rights of women in Northern Ireland — Pregnant women and girls — Autonomy and bodily integrity — Right to respect for private and family life — Rights of persons ...
Atypical business law provisions
Atypical business law provisions
The article is devoted to the vision of atypical business law provisions. It was found that the state of scientific opinion regarding atypical business law provisions is irrelevant...
On the Status of Rights
On the Status of Rights
Photo by Patrick Tomasso on Unsplash
ABSTRACT
In cases where the law conflicts with bioethics, the status of rights must be determined to resolve some of the tensions. ...
Hydatid Cyst of The Orbit: A Systematic Review with Meta-Data
Hydatid Cyst of The Orbit: A Systematic Review with Meta-Data
Abstarct
Introduction
Orbital hydatid cysts (HCs) constitute less than 1% of all cases of hydatidosis, yet their occurrence is often linked to severe visual complications. This stu...

