美日法制下非合意併購防禦措施於我國適用之可行性

Abstract

隨著全球化競爭的愈演愈烈，併購已成為企業由熾烈競爭中脫穎而出的主要手段之一，而非合意併購更是併購議題中最受注目的焦點。放眼先進國家，如美國及日本，均對於非合意併購防禦措施建立起一套適法性之審查標準，反觀我國，自2002年企業併購法公布施行以來，至今尚未就非合意併購防禦措施作出任何形式的規範。 是故，本文以非合意併購定義為起點，接續整理美國法與日本法如何透過立法、司法實務或行政機關提出之建議文書等方式，逐步建構非合意併購防禦措施之適法性判斷標準，並發展出各式各樣的防禦措施。其後，本文從我國法制現況出發，試圖分析數個我國非合意併購案例中所產生之法律問題及其潛在違法性疑慮之問題。最後，本文以比較法上觀點，逐一分析美日兩國併購法制下之適法性判斷標準及防禦措施是否適合為我國法所採，希望藉此能夠構築起一套均衡併購方與目標公司利益之制度，作為我國法未來建立相關規範之參考。

With the business competition getting fiercer in the course of globalization, M&A has become one of the most major paths to win out rivals. Developed countries such as United States and Japan had built a set of judicial review standards towards anti-takeover defenses long time ago. On the contrary, no adoption of any laws or regulations specified in regard with the defense tactics against unsolicited takeover here in Taiwan, ever since the Business Mergers and Acquisitions Act promulgated in 2002. This thesis presents an introduction and an explanation of the legitimacy of anti-takeover defenses centered on laws of U.S. and Japan. This thesis begins by introducing and explaining the definition of mergers and acquisitions, and unsolicited takeovers in Taiwan. It also introduces the legislative history of mergers and acquisitions, anti-takeover statutes and administrative rules enacted by governmental authorities, judicial review standards in U.S. and Japan. Furthermore, it discusses the legitimacy of various anti-takeover defensive measures in the U.S., Japan and Taiwan, and also to analyze whether the legal systems of U.S. and Japan are suitable as a reference for Taiwan to establish relevant laws and regulations in the future.