Skip navigation

DSpace

機構典藏 DSpace 系統致力於保存各式數位資料(如:文字、圖片、PDF)並使其易於取用。

點此認識 DSpace
DSpace logo
English
中文
  • 瀏覽論文
    • 校院系所
    • 出版年
    • 作者
    • 標題
    • 關鍵字
  • 搜尋 TDR
  • 授權 Q&A
    • 我的頁面
    • 接受 E-mail 通知
    • 編輯個人資料
  1. NTU Theses and Dissertations Repository
  2. 法律學院
  3. 科際整合法律學研究所
請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/19019
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位值語言
dc.contributor.advisor王文宇
dc.contributor.authorSyun-Ya Jhaoen
dc.contributor.author趙珣雅zh_TW
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-08T01:42:31Z-
dc.date.copyright2016-08-25
dc.date.issued2016
dc.date.submitted2016-08-17
dc.identifier.citation壹、中文資料
一、專書
王文宇。《公司法論》(2006),修訂3版。台北:元照。
張清溪、許嘉棟、劉鶯釧、吳聰敏(2007)。《經濟學》。台北:翰蘆圖書。
Douglass C. North(著),劉瑞華(譯)(1995)。《經濟史的結構與變遷》。台北:時報文化。
Douglass C. North(著),劉瑞華(譯)(1995)。《制度、制度變遷與經濟成就》。台北:時報文化。
Justice Randy J. Holland(著),陳春山(主持編譯)(2011)。《美國公司法-德拉瓦州公司法經典案例選輯》。台北:新學林。
貳、英文資料
一、專書
Chandler Jr, A. D. (1993). The visible hand: The managerial revolution in American business. Harvard University Press.
Farnsworth, W. (2007). The legal analyst-a toolkit for thinking about the law, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
二、期刊論文
Adkins, J. W. (2012). Guide to predicting the calculation of attorneys' fees under Delaware law for shareholders suits, Delaware Journal of Corporate Law,37, 501-530.
Bainbridge, S. M. (2003). The business judgment rule as abstention doctrine. UCLA, School of Law, Law and Econ. Research Paper 03-18, 1-50.
Bebchuk, L. A. and Brav, A. and Jiang, W. (2015). The long-term effects of hedge fund activism. Harvard Law School John M. Olin Center Discussion Paper No. 802; Columbia Law Review, 115, 1085-1156.
Bork, R. H. and J. G. Sidak (2012). What does the Chicago school teach about internet search and the antitrust treatment of google?, Journal of Competition Law and Economics, 8(4), 663-700.
Calabresi, G. & Melamed, A. (1972). Property rules, liability rules, and inalienability: One view of the cathedral. Harvard Law Review,85(6), 1089-1128.
Cheung, S. N. (1983). The contractual nature of the firm. The Journal of Law & Economics, 26(1), 1-21.
Coase, R. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica,4(16), new series, 386-405.
Coase, R. (1960). The problem of social cost. The Journal of Law & Economics, 3, 1-44.
Coffee, J. (1986). Understanding the plaintiff's attorney: The implications of economic theory for private enforcement of law through class and derivative actions. Columbia Law Review, 86(4), 669-727.
Daniels, R. J. (1990). Should provinces compete? The case for a competitive corporate law market. McGill Law Journal, 36, 130-190.
Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of political action in a democracy. Journal of Political Economy, 65(2), 135-150. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1827369
Eisenhart, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14 (1), 57-74.
Edelman, P. H. , Thomas, R. S. and Thompson, R. B., Shareholder Voting in an Age of Intermediary Capitalism, South Carolina Law Review, 87(6), 1359-1434.
Gilson, R. J. and Gordon, J. N. (2013). The agency costs of agency capitalism: Activist investors and the revaluation of governance rights. Columbia Law Review, 113, 863-928.
Hamermesh, L. (2006). The Policy foundations of Delaware corporate law. Columbia Law Review, 106(7), 1749-1792.
Jacobs, J. B. (2015). Fifty years of corporate law evolution: A Delaware judge's retrospective. Harvard Business Law Review, 5, 141-172.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of financial economics, 3(4), 305-360.
Kovacic, W. &Shapiro, C. (2000). Antitrust Policy: A century of economic and legal thinking. The Journal of Economic Perspectives,14(1), 43-60.
Langevoort, D. C. (2005). Federalism in corporate/securities law: Reflections on Delaware, California, and state regulation of insider trading. USFL Rev., 40, 879-892.
Manning, B. (1962). The shareholder's appraisal remedy: An essay for Frank Coker. The Yale Law Journal, 72(2), 223-265.
Milgrom, P. R., & North, D. C. (1990). The role of institutions in the revival of trade: The law merchant, private judges, and the champagne fairs. Economics & Politics, 2(1), 1-23.
Rolf Str?m-Olsen (2013). The logistics of the roman grain trade: Details and implications. IE Business. Retrieved from: https://d396qusza40orc.cloudfront.net/ criticalmanagement%2FLogistics%20of%20the%20Roman%20Grain%20Trade.pdf
Romano, R. (1985). Law as a product: some pieces of the incorporation puzzle. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 1(2), 225-283.
Rutherford, M. (2001). Institutional economics: Then and Now. The Journal of Economic Perspectives,15(3), 173-194.
Simmons, O. S. (2007). Branding the small wonder: Delaware’s dominance and the market for corporate law. University of Richmond Law Review, 42, 1129-1194.
Sitkoff, R. H. (2011), The economic structure of fiduciary law. Boston University Law Review, 91, 1039-1049.
Stevens, M. (2006). Internal affairs doctrine: California versus Delaware in a fight for the right to regulate foreign corporations. Boston College Law Review, 48, 1047-1087.
Wagner, D. (1986). The new elite plaintiffs' bar. ABA Journal, 72 (2), 44. Retrieved from: https://goo.gl/z89HRH
三、法院判決
Blasius Indus., Inc. v. Atlas Corp., 564 A.2d 651 (Del. Ch. 1988).
Brown. V. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
In Re Agent Orange Prod. Liability Litigation, 818 F.2d 145 (1987).
In Re Ebix, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, Consolidated CA No. 8526-VCN (Del. Ch. Jan. 15, 2016).
In Re Nine Systems Corporation Shareholders Litigation, Consolidated CA No. 3940-VCN (Del. Ch. May 7, 2015).
In Re Trulia, Inc., Consolidated CA No. 10020-CB (Del. Ch. Jan. 22, 2016).
MM Companies, Inc. v. Liquid Audio, Inc., 813 A.2d 1118 (Del. 2003).
Pell v. KILL, CA No. 12251-VCL (Del. Ch. May 19, 2016).
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896)
Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc., 506 A.2d 173 (Del. 1986).
Spur Industries, Inc. v. Del E. Webb Development Co.,108 Ariz. 178 (1972).
United States v. Baker Hughes, Inc., 908 F.2d 981 (1990).
United States v. General Dynamics Corp., 415 U.S. 486 (1974).
Unocal Corp. v. Mesa Petroleum Co., 493 A.2d 946 (Del. 1985).
VantagePoint Venture Partners v. Examen, Inc., 871 A.2d 1108 (Del.Supr.,2005).
Santa Fe Industries, Inc. v. Green, 430 U.S. 462 (1977).
Seinfeld v. Verizon Communications Inc., 909 A.2d 117 (Del. 2006).
dc.identifier.urihttp://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/19019-
dc.description.abstract公司法的目的之一即為處理公司不同成員之間的代理問題,而德拉瓦州公司法在美國各州公司法中具有卓越地位。據此,本論文聚焦於董事與股東之間的代理問題,並分析德拉瓦州的公司法制度如何平衡董事的代理權力與責任。
本論文採用Douglass North的制度理論以分析德拉瓦州的公司法制度,其中包含三個部分,分別為(一)財產權理論,其描述體制中個人與群體的誘因;(二)政府理論:政府如何界定與執行財產權;(三)意識形態理論:解釋人們對於現實認知不同如何影響其對「客觀」狀態變化的詮釋。
第一章是緒論。第二章為制度經濟學與Douglass North制度分析,制度經濟學說明制度的必要性在於社會中存在交易成本,而不同的制度可以減少交易成本以促進交易,並說明代理中主要交易成本為交易前的衡量成本與交易後執行的監督成本。
第三章為代理問題解析,介紹代理問題起於代理人與委託人間資訊的不對稱與利益衝突,以及處理代理問題時可能帶來的成本與問題,據此分析德拉瓦州公司法制度中,其如何依據代理問題嚴重性的不同,適用不同的審查標準,因而得以保留商業判斷中的裁量權,同時抑制濫用管理權。
第四章為衡量成本與相關判決,介紹機構投資者、股東投票諮詢公司,以及積極股東的存在有助於降低股東衡量成本,對應於此,德拉瓦州法院藉由仔細審視董事可能侵害股東行使公司民主化權利的行為,保護股東選舉權,並禁止董事為了避免公司控制權競爭的不正行為。
第五章為監督成本與相關判決,介紹股東訴訟外部性所導致的監督不足,以及對應該外部性問題而給予律師費獎勵。律師費獎勵藉由改變訴訟的誘因讓律師成為訴訟能動者去監督董事,但也可能因此產生濫訴與勾結,因此需要法院的介入審視。
第六章為德拉瓦州意識形態與總結,介紹公司註冊市場,因為該市場存在使得公司做為買方得以購買各州所產出公司法制度,而各州做為賣方可透過出售公司法制度而獲得稅收。公司法制度所產生的稅收盈餘,使得德拉瓦州願意投資於公司法制度以積極回應公司需求與競爭壓力。
zh_TW
dc.description.abstractOne goal of corporate law is to deal with the agency problem between different members of a corporation, and Delaware corporate law dominates in the state corporate laws. Accordingly, this thesis focuses on the agency problem between shareholders and directors and analyzes how Delaware corporate law as an institution balances the authority and accountability of directors as agents.
This thesis adopts the Douglass North's institutional framework to analyze Delaware corporate law, and the framework includes three parts: 1. a theory of property right that describes the individual and group incentives in the system; 2. a theory of the state, since it is the state that specifies and enforces property rights; 3. a theory of ideology that explains how different perceptions of reality affect the reaction of individuals to the changing “objective” situation.
Chapter one is a preface. Chapter two focuses on institutional economics and Douglass North's institutional framework. Two topics are introduced: first, the reason institutions matter is that transaction costs exist and various institutions may reduce the transaction cost to improve transaction efficiency; second, the main transaction costs in an agency contract are the measuring cost and the monitoring cost.
Chapter three focuses on the agency problem analysis. I introduce here that the reasons of the agency problem are information asymmetry and a conflict of interest between agents and principles, and the costs and problems may arise by dealing with the agency problem. Accordingly, Delaware corporate law applies different standards of review depending on seriousness of the agency problem, and therefore directors can remain the full discretion of business judgment but be restrained from abuse of power.
Chapter four focuses on measuring cost and related Delaware court decisions. Institutional investors, proxy advisory firms and activist investors existing in the market help to reduce measuring cost. Accordingly, Delaware courts carefully review any board actions designed to impede the effective exercise of corporate democracy by shareholders, therefore protecting the stockholder franchise and negating unlawful efforts by the directors to maintain board control.
Chapter five focuses on monitoring cost and related Delaware court decisions. Positive externality of shareholder litigation causes inadequate supervision on directors and attorney fee award is used for dealing with the problem of externalities. Attorney fee award provides attorneys incentives to supervise directors actively, but also causes problems such as frivolous litigation and collusion, and therefore the court intervention is needed.
Chapter six focuses on the ideology of Delaware and the summary. Because of the existence of national incorporation market, corporations as buyers can purchase the corporate law produced by each state and states as sellers can sell corporate law to earn tax revenue. The tax revenue makes Delaware to invest its corporate law to response to the needs of corporations and the competitive pressure.
en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T01:42:31Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
ntu-105-R99a41007-1.pdf: 1032920 bytes, checksum: d685e453c2041d089f492111a3f59a5b (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2016
en
dc.description.tableofcontents口試委員會審定書 i
誌謝 ii
中文摘要 iii
英文摘要 v
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機 1
第二節 研究範圍與方法 2
第三節 論文架構 3
第二章 Douglass North制度分析 4
第一節 制度理論介紹 4
第一項 制度分析必要性:存在交易成本 4
第二項 交易成本如何應用於法院判決 8
第二節 財產權交易制度建立 11
第一項 Douglass North的制度理論 12
第二項 代理行為中的制度分析 14
第三款 小結 21
第三章 代理問題介紹 22
第一節 代理理論 22
第二節 代理問題的處理機制 25
第一項 介紹代理問題 25
第二項 公司法實務上的機制 26
第三節 德拉瓦州法院 29
第一項 商業判斷法則與完全公平標準 29
第二項 中間階段的審查標準 34
第四章 交易成立前的衡量 46
第一節 股東選舉 47
第二節 德拉瓦州判決:公司民主化原則 52
第一項 MM Companies, Inc. v. LIQUID audio, Inc. (2002) 54
第二項 In re Ebix, Inc. Stockholder Litigation (2016) 59
第三項 結論 61
第五章 交易成立後的執行 63
第一節 監督的外部性問題 63
第二節 獎勵律師費的誘因與缺失 65
第三節 律師費獎勵的德拉瓦州判決 68
第一項 In re Nine Systems Corporation Shareholders Litigation (2015) 69
第二項In re Trulia Inc. Shareholder Litigation (2016) 70
第四節 股東資訊權 71
第一項 Seinfeld v. Verizon Communications Inc. (2006) 72
第二項 結論 77
第六章 德拉瓦州司法組織意識形態 78
第一節 公司註冊登記市場 78
第一項 法律競爭市場形成 78
第二項 美國公司註冊市場形成 80
第二節 各組織的意識形態 82
第一項 德拉瓦州政府誘因 82
第二項 德拉瓦州律師公會與立法機構 83
第三項 德拉瓦州法院 84
第四項 結論 85
參考文獻 86
dc.language.isozh-TW
dc.title德拉瓦州公司法制度研究:
-以諾斯的制度理論為核心
zh_TW
dc.titleAn Institutional Analysis of Delaware Corporation Law-
Based on Institutional Theory from Douglas North
en
dc.typeThesis
dc.date.schoolyear104-2
dc.description.degree碩士
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee林仁光,王煦棋
dc.subject.keyword制度經濟學,道格拉斯?諾斯,交易成本,代理問題,公司民主化,律師費獎勵,zh_TW
dc.subject.keywordInstitutional Economics,Douglas North,Transaction Cost,Agency Problem,Corporate Democracy,Attorney Fee Award,en
dc.relation.page90
dc.identifier.doi10.6342/NTU201603170
dc.rights.note未授權
dc.date.accepted2016-08-18
dc.contributor.author-college法律學院zh_TW
dc.contributor.author-dept科際整合法律學研究所zh_TW
顯示於系所單位:科際整合法律學研究所

文件中的檔案:
檔案 大小格式 
ntu-105-1.pdf
  目前未授權公開取用
1.01 MBAdobe PDF
顯示文件簡單紀錄


系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。

社群連結
聯絡資訊
10617臺北市大安區羅斯福路四段1號
No.1 Sec.4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. 106
Tel: (02)33662353
Email: ntuetds@ntu.edu.tw
意見箱
相關連結
館藏目錄
國內圖書館整合查詢 MetaCat
臺大學術典藏 NTU Scholars
臺大圖書館數位典藏館
本站聲明
© NTU Library All Rights Reserved