請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/22040完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 曾宛如 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Hui-Chi Wang | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 王蕙琦 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T03:59:20Z | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2018-10-03 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2018 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2018-08-13 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 中文文獻(依作者姓氏排列)
一、專書 Adrian Buckley著,梁為仁譯(2013),金融風暴的第一本教科書,台北:五南。[Buckley, Adrian. 2011. Financial crisis causes, context and consequences. Edinburgh: Pearson.] Carmen M. Reinhart, Kenneth S. Rogoff著,劉道捷、陳旭華譯(2015),這次不一樣:800年金融危機史,三版,台北:大牌。[Reinhart, Carmen M., and Rogoff, Kenneth S. 2009. This time is different: eight centuries of financial folly. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Pearson Higher Ed. George Soros著,李隆生譯(2012),歐元美金大風暴,台北:聯經。[Soros, George. 2012. Financial turmoil in Europe and the United States. New York, N.Y.: PublicAffairs.] Joseph E. Stiglitz, Member of a UN Commission of Financial Experts著,洪慧芳譯(2011),扭轉全球化危機-史迪格里茲報告,台北:天下。[Stiglitz, Joseph E., and United Nations. General Assembly. 2010. The Stiglitz report: reforming the international monetary and financial systems in the wake of the global crisis. New York, N.Y: The New Press.] Raghuram G. Rajan著,羅耀宗、李建興、周玉文譯(2011),金融斷層線-無形裂縫如何威脅全球經濟,台北:高寶。[Rajan, Raghuram G. 2010. Fault lines: how hidden fractures still threaten the world economy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.] Robert J. Shiller著,林麗冠譯(2014),金融與美好社會(Finance and the Good Society),台北:天下。[Shiller, Robert J. 2012. Finance and the Good Society. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.] 大前研一著,陳光棻譯(2012),美國,再見?-後金融危機的全球趨勢,台北:中華工商聯合出版社。[大前硏一(2009),さらば アメリカ,東京都:小学館。] 文光(1992),德國社會市場經濟的發展,台北:遠流。 王文宇(2008),公司法論,四版,台北:元照。 王泰銓(1991),歐洲公司法之研究,台北:行政院經濟建設委員會健全經社法規工作小組。 王泰銓(2009),歐洲事業法(一):歐洲公司企業組織法,二版,台北:五南。 吳光明(2015),證券交易法論,增訂13版,台北:三民。 易明秋(2007),公司治理法制論,台北:五南。 徐俊明(2013),投資學:理論與實務,八版,台北:新陸。 馬漢寶(2014),國際私法,三版,台北:翰蘆。 陳師孟(2006),政治經濟:現代理論與台灣應用,台北:翰蘆。 陳麗娟(2010),歐洲經濟法,三版,台北:五南。 陳麗娟(2013),里斯本條約後歐洲聯盟新面貌,二版,台北:五南。 劉連煜(2010),現代公司法,增訂六版,台北:新學林。 賴英照(2014),最新證券交易法解析:股市遊戲規則,三版,台北:元照。 謝易宏、陳德純(2003),後安隆時代的一線曙光-論2002年美國企業改革法對公司治理之影響,台北:瑞興。 二、專書論文 吳建輝(2015),歐盟對外經貿協定在歐盟法體系之地位,收於:歐盟法之基礎原則與實務發展(下),頁351-408,台北:臺大出版中心。 洪秀芬(2016),從德國股份公司監事會制度趨近於單軌制董事會之設計反思我國監察人制度之改革方向,收於:賴英照講座教授七秩華誕祝賀論文集編輯委員會編,當前公司與證券法制新趨勢-賴英照講座教授七秩華誕祝賀論文集,頁237-268,台北:元照。 洪德欽(2015),歐盟法的淵源,收於:歐盟法之基礎原則與實務發展(上),頁1-56,台北:臺大出版中心。 陳彥良(2007),公司治理法治化之研究-德國公司治理法典經營機關制度設計之啟示,收於:公司治理法治-公司內部機關組織職權論,頁49-101,台北:翰蘆。 陳麗娟(2009),從德國「公司治理規約」看該國公司治理之改革,收於:全球化之公司治理,頁42-79,台北:五南。 黃偉峰(2012),「歐洲化」課題之各類研究方法與取向,收於:黃偉峰編,歐洲化之衝擊,頁17-48,台北:五南。 黃富櫻(2009),本次金融危機之五個重要個案分析,收於:全球金融危機專輯,頁47-72,台北:中央銀行。 黃銘傑(2012),第十章證券化基本原理,收於:王文宇等合著,金融法,頁315-336,台北:元照。 劉連煜(1995),累積投票制與應選董事人數之縮減,收於:公司法理論與判決研究(一),23-34頁,台北:三民。 謝易宏(2011),浪子回頭-簡介美國金融法制改革,收於:謝易宏編,流金華年-經典財經案例選粹,頁1-23,台北:五南。 三、期刊論文 王志誠(2009),銀行業經營危機之處理及因應機制,月旦法學雜誌,第165期,頁5-28。 李貴英、聶家音(2014),歐洲聯盟經濟治理與金融監理架構之改革,月旦法學雜誌,第232期,頁80-113。 谷月涵(2015),政府削弱銀行放款能力,今周刊,第965期,頁18。 林仁光(2006),董事會功能性分工之法制課題-經營權功能之強化與內部監控機制之設計,臺大法學論叢,第35卷第1期,頁157-266。 林俊銘(2014),美國Dodd-Frank Act 有關證券化利益衝突規範之評析-給台灣的借鏡,財產法暨經濟法,第37期,頁59-106。 林淑芸、金旻姍(2015),美國COSO內部控制相關報告之介紹,證券暨期貨月刊,第33卷第6期,頁5-12。 邵慶平(2009),金融危機的形成、處理機制與法制基礎-對美國次級房貸金融危機的觀察,月旦法學雜誌,第165期,頁29-45。 洪秀芬(2016),德國股份公司單軌制及雙軌制之建構,月旦法學雜誌,第258期,頁20-38。 陳彥良(2006),股東會、董事會、監事會於德國公司治理法典中法規範地位之探討,政大法學評論,第89期,頁143-192。 陳麗娟(2006),從美國法與德國法股份有限公司董事會之規定論我國股份有限公司董事會之組織架構,高大法學論叢,第2卷1期,頁115-146。 陳麗娟(2015),金融風暴後歐盟金融業公司治理改革之探討,法令月刊,第66卷第7期,頁69-92。 傅豐誠(2004),從公司治理的微觀基礎探討我國強制設立獨立董事之必要性,經社法制論叢,第34期,頁41-75。 曾宛如(2003),我國有關公司治理之省思-以獨立董監事法制之改革為例,月旦法學雜誌,第103期,頁61-76。 曾宛如(2017),論董事候選人提名制,月旦法學教室,第180期,頁39-50。 曾煌鈞(2017年),淺談家族企業之治理,證券暨期貨月刊,第35期第9期,頁32-47。 劉連煜(2003),健全獨立董監事與公司治理之法制研究-公司自治、外部監控與政府規制之交錯,月旦法學雜誌,第94期,頁131-154。 第三款 學位論文 姜宥汝(2014),避險基金管制之研究-系統性風險和投資人保護,國立台灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文,台北。 英文文獻(依字母排列) 一、專書 Bainbridge, Stephen M. 2012. Corporate Governance after the Financial Crisis. New York, NY: Oxford University. Bouchoux, Deborah E.. 2007. Business Organizations for Paralegals, 4th ed. New York, NY: Aspen Publishers. Cerioni, Luca. 2007. EU Corporate Law and EU Company Tax Law. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Chiappinelli, Eric A.. 2014. Cases and Materials on Business Entities, 3rd ed. New York, NY: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. Geen, Koen and Hopt, Klaus J. eds. 2010. European Company Law Action Plan Revisited: Reassessment of the 2003 Priorities of the European Commission. Leuven: Leuven University Press. Grundmann, Stefan. 2012. European Company Law: Organization, Finance and Capital Markets. 2nd ed. Portland, OR: Intersentia. Hamilton, James et al. 2012. Dodd-Frank Manual Series: Securities Regulation and Corporate Governance. New York, NY: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. Heinrich, Ralph P.. 2002. Complementarities in Corporate Governance. New York, NY: Springer. Johnston, Andrew. 2010. EC Regulation of Corporate Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Larcker, David F. and Tayan, Brian. 2013. A Real Look at Real World Corporate Governance. Miller, Geoffrey Parsons. 2014. The Law of Governance, Risk Management, and Compliance. New York, NY: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. Plessis, Jean J. du and Luttermann, Claus. 2012. German Corporate Governance in International and European Contex. New York, NY: Springer. Wearing, Robert and Wearing, Bob. 2005. Cases in Corporate Governance. London: SAGE. 二、期刊論文 Bebchuk, Lucian A. and Hamdani, Assaf. 2017. Independent Directors and Controlling Shareholders. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 165:1271-1315. Davies, Paul L. and Hopt, Klaus J. 2013. Corporate Boards in Europe-Accountability and Convergence. The American Journal of Comparative Law 61:301-376. Enriquesl, Luca. 2007 EC Company Law Directives and Regulations: How Trivial Are They?. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law 27:1-78. Ferrarini, Guido and Filippelli, Marilena. 2014. Independent Directors and Controlling Shareholders Around the World. European Corp. Governance Institute (ECGI). Working Paper 258:1-39. Gordon, Jeffrey N. 1999. Pathways to Corporate Convergence? Two Steps on the Road to Shareholder Capitalism in Germany: Deutsche Telekom and Daimler Chrysler. Columbia Journal of European Law 5:219-240. Hopt, Klaus J. 2011. Comparative Corporate Governance: The State of the Art and International Regulation. American Journal of Comparative Law 59(1):1-79 Ringe, Wolf-Georg. 2015. Changing Law and Ownership Patterns in Germany: Corporate Governance and the Erosion of Deutschland AG. American Journal of Comparative Law 63:493-538. Romano, Roberta. 2005. The Sarbanes- Oxley Act and the Making of Quack Corporate Governance. The Yale Law Journal 114:1521-1611. Yorulmazer, Tanju. 2008. Liquidity, Bank Runs and Bailouts: Spillover Effects during the Northern Rock Episode. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1107570. 三、專書論文 Andersen, Paul Krüger. 2010. The European Model Company Act (EMCA) - A New Way Forward, Pp. 303-325 in: Company Law and Economic Protectionism: New Challenge to European Integration, edited by Ulf Bernitz & Wolf-Georg Ringe. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Böckli, Peter. 2013. Corporate Boards in Switzerland. Pp. 655-711 in Corporate Boards in Law and Practice: A Comparative Analysis in Europe, edited by Paul Davies, Klaus Hopt, Richard Nowak & Gerard van Solinge. London: Oxford University Press. Bratton, William W & Joseph A McCahery & Erik P M Vermeulen. 2012. How Does Corporate Mobility Affect Law Making? A Comparative Analysis, Pp. 429-459 in: Corporate Finance Law in the UK and EU, edited by Dan Prentice & Arad Reisberg. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Davies, Paul and Hopt, Klause J. and Nowak, Richard G.J. and Solinge, Gerard Van. 2013. Boards in Law and Practice: A Cross-Country Analysis in Europe. Pp. 4-116 in Corporate Boards in Law and Practice: A Comparative Analysis in Europe, edited by Paul Davies, Klaus Hopt, Richard Nowak & Gerard van Solinge. London: Oxford University Press Geens, Koen. 2013. Corporate Boards in Belgium. Pp. 120-173 in Corporate Boards in Law and Practice: A Comparative Analysis in Europe, edited by Paul Davies, Klaus Hopt, Richard Nowak & Gerard van Solinge. London: Oxford University Press. Hopt, Klaus J. 1998. The German Two-Tier Board: Experience, Theories, Reforms. Pp. 227-257 in Comparative Corporate Governance- The State of the Art and Emerging Research, edited by K. J. Hopt, H. Kanda, M. J. Roe, E. Wymeersch and S. Prigge. New York : Oxford University Press. Hopt, Klaus J. 2017. The German Law of and Experience with the Supervisory Board. Pp. 123-142 in Foreign Investments on Chinese Capital Markets: Enforcement Concepts from a Chinese and German Comparative Perspective, edited by Rüdiger Veil, Xujun Gao. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Ek. Janssens, Elke. 2017. Belgium. Pp. 26-50 in The Corporate Governance Review, 7th ed., edited by Williem J L Calkoen. London: Law Business Research. Pietrancosta, Aalain & Romain Garçon. Corporate Boards in France. 2013. Pp. 177-250 in Corporate Boards in Law and Practice: A Comparative Analysis in Europe, edited by Paul Davies, Klaus Hopt, Richard Nowak & Gerard van Solinge. London: Oxford University Press. Ringe, Wolf-Georg. 2012. Is Volkswagen the New Centros? Free Movement of Capital’s Impact on Company Law, Pp. 461-492 in: Corporate Finance Law in The UK and EU (Dan Prentice & Arad Reisberg eds.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Roth, Markus. 2013. Corporate Boards in Germany. Pp. 256-364 in Corporate Boards in Law and Practice: A Comparative Analysis in Europe, edited by Paul Davies, Klaus Hopt, Richard Nowak & Gerard van Solinge. London: Oxford University Press. Sande, Carsten van de and Sven H Schneider. 2017. Germany., Pp. 167-182 in The Corporate Governance Review, 7th ed., edited by Williem J L Calkoen. London: Law Business Research. 四、法院判決 Case 81/87 The Queen v HM Treasury and Commissioners of Inland Revenue, ex parte Daily Mail and General Trust PLC [1988] ERC 5483. Case C-212/97 Centros Ltd v Erhvervs- og Selskabsstyrelsen [1999] ERC I-1459. Case C-208/00 Überseering BV v Nordic Construction Company Baumanagement GmbH (NCC) [2002] ECR I-9919. Case C-367/98 - Commission v Portugal [2002]. Case C-167/01 Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken voor Amsterdam v. Inspire Art Ltd [2003] ECR I-10155. Case C-112/05 Commission v Germany [2007] ECR I-8995. 五、歐盟相關報告 Communication from the Commission - Implementing the Framework for Financial Markets: Action Plan, COM (1999) 232 final. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Modernising Company Law and Enhancing Corporate Governance in the European Union - A Plan to Move Forward, COM (2003) 284 final. Green Paper: Corporate governance in financial institutions and remuneration policies, COM (2010) 284 final. Green Paper: Audit Policy: Lessons from the Crisis, COM (2010) 561 final. Green Paper: The EU corporate governance framework, COM (2011) 164 final. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Action Plan: European company law and corporate governance - A Modern Legal Framework for More Engaged Shareholders and Sustainable Companies, COM (2012) 740 final 網路資源 Larosière, Jacques de. Report of High-Level Group on Financial Supervision in EU (2009), http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/finances/docs/de_larosiere_report_ en.pdf. Winter, Jaap. Final Report of the High Level Group of Company Law Experts on a Modern Regulatory Framework for Company Law in Europe (Final Winter Report) (2002), http://www.ecgi.org/publications/documents/report_en.pdf. Directorate General for Internal Market, and Services: Consultation on Future Priorities for The Action Plan on Modernising Company Law and Enhancing Corporate Governance in The European Union, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/company/docs/consultation/consultation_en.pdf. European Model Company Act (EMCA) (2017), available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2929348. European Model Company Act (EMCA) Draft (2015), available at: http://commerciallaw.com.ua/attachments/article/96/Final%20Draft%20EMCA%20Code.pdf. German Corporate Governance Code (February 7, 2017), available at: http://www.dc gk.de//files/dcgk/usercontent/en/download/code/170214_Code.pdf. German Corporate Governance Code (May 5, 2015), available at: https://www.dcgk.de/en/code/archive.html?file=files/dcgk/usercontent/en/download/code/2015-05-05_Corporate_Governance_Code_EN.pdf. Heidrick & Struggles, European Corporate Governance 2011: Challenging board performance (2011), available at: https://www.cgov.pt/images/stories/ficheiros /hs_europeancorpgovrpt2011.pdf. Heidrick & Struggles, European Corporate Governance Report 2013 (2014), available at: http://www.heidrick.com/~/media/Publications%20and%20Reports/Europe an-Corporate-Governance-Report-2014-Towards-Dynamic-Governance.pdf. Reflection Group on the Future of EU Company Law (2011), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/company/docs/modern/reflectiongroup_report_en.pdf. Statement of the European Corporate Governance Forum, Cross-border issues of Corporate Governance (2009), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_marke t/company/docs/ecgforum/ecgf-crossborder_en.pdf. Study on Monitoring and Enforcement Practices in Corporate Governance in the Member States (2009), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/compa ny/docs/ecgforum/studies/comply-or-explain-090923_en.pdf. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/22040 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本文之核心係在探討如何落實我國公司治理獨立性。我國為提升董事會之效能、落實監督以及與世界各國之公司治理接軌,自2005年證券交易法引進獨立董事與審計委員會之制度,我國上市上櫃公司業已於2017年起須設置至少二名以上獨立董事,並須設置相關功能委員會,我國上市上櫃公司之架構即從公司法下設置董監事的雙軌制,過渡到設立獨立董事及相關功能委員會的單軌制。此外,近年發生樂陞案、兆豐金遭美國紐約州金融服務署罰款及兆豐金之三寶案,實務及學界都在思考如何使獨立董事落實其獨立性及職能。又由於獨立董事具有召開股東會之權限,又得於審計委員會中針對公司之重大議案提出意見,於經營權爭奪時,市場派將極力爭取獨立董事之席次,諸如:台新金控與彰化銀行及台新金控與寶佳集團的經營權爭奪,即是公司派與市場派與獨立董事之席次的角力。特別是我國的股權結構,大多數為家族企業,公司之董事會亦多由對公司具有控制力之家族成員占有多數席次。如何在控制股東與公司的獨立性達到一個平衡狀態,是本文欲探討的核心。
本文將從2000年之高科技泡沫至2008年的次貸危機發現公司治理失靈的情形,並探討獨立董事的重要性日漸提升之原因。而歐盟自1999年起亦針對公司治理作成許多報告、綠皮書及行動計劃,除了為了增進歐盟會員國的公司治理外,也為了使歐洲公司法於各國間的適用可以達到趨同的情形,如單軌制與雙軌制之選擇即為一實例,而本文亦藉此以弭平我國對於單軌制與雙軌制之爭論。此外,我國的股權結構與歐盟多數國家較為雷同,皆屬家族企業的情形,本文將針對德國、瑞士、比利時及法國,不同的公司治理架構下探討家族企業對於公司治理制度之影響,最後並提出增強型獨立董事,並就我國公司治理架構提出建議。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | The core of this thesis is to study how to fulfill the independence of corporate governance in Taiwan. To make the operation of board of directors more efficiency, fulfill the supervision mechanism in the company, and catch up with corporate governance in other countries around the world, the regime of independent directors and audit committees was introduced, and relevant provisions are set out in the amendment of Securities Exchange Act in 2005. From 2017, at least two independent directors and relevant functional committees shall be set up in the listed companies. The supervision mechanism in the listed companies in Taiwan is changed from the two-tier board to one-tier board. In recent years, due to the case of XPEC Entertainment and Mega Bank, there is a wild discussion about how to fulfill the independence and functions of independent directors in theory and practice. Further, the independent directors is entitled to convene a shareholder meeting, and they may provide the opinion to the major resolutions of the company in the audit committee. When the shareholders fight for corporate control, those who are not the member of the board of director will strive to take the seats of independent directors, such as: corporate control fights between Taishin Financial Holding and Changhua Bank, and the fight between Taishin Financial Holding and PJ Asset Management. In particular, most companies in Taiwan are family-owned, and the board of directors is consisted of family members. How to maintain a balance between controlling shareholder and company independence is the core of this thesis.
This thesis studies the failure of corporate governance from the Technology Boom in 2000 to the subprime mortgage crisis in 2008, and analyze the importance of independent directors through these cases. Since 1999, the European Union published reports, green papers and action plans for corporate governance to promote corporate governance in EU member states, and to reduce the inconsistency in the laws and regulations adopted by European countries, such as one-tier or two-tier board. This thesis intents to use matter adopted by EU to eliminate the debate on the one-tier and two-tier board in Taiwan. Furthermore, shareholding structure in Taiwan is similar to most of EU countries (i.e. most of them are family-owned firms). This thesis will discuss the impact of family-owned firms on corporate governance systems in Germany, Switzerland, Belgium and France, and, finally, proposes the resolutions such as setting up the enhanced-independence directors or changing the corporate governance structure in Taiwan. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T03:59:20Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-107-R01a21076-1.pdf: 3875661 bytes, checksum: d6184560e8cea704ec3fd0f2e01029d4 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 1 第二節 研究方法與架構 5 第二章 全球金融危機之啟示 7 第一節 從高科技泡沫到全球金融危機 7 第一項 國家經濟政策-政府失靈 7 第二項 高科技泡沫 12 第三項 全球金融危機 23 第二節 各國因應全球金融危機之對策 34 第一項 美國 34 第二項 歐盟 36 第三項 德國 38 第四項 臺灣 38 第三節 結語:全球金融危機引發公司治理之新議題 40 第一項 何謂公司治理? 40 第二項 公司治理之類型 45 第三項 公司對於內部機關獨立性之要求 47 第四項 小結 48 第三章 歐盟公司治理 50 第一節 歐洲之整合 50 第一項 歐盟之派生法律之範圍及效力 51 第二項 歐洲化(Europeanization) 53 第二節 歐盟法院對於歐洲公司法整合之貢獻 56 第一項 關於營業所設立自由之相關判決 56 第二項 針對資本流通自由歐盟法院所做出之判決 60 第三節 法規規範之現代化:歐盟制定統一公司法之必要性? 64 第一項 歐洲公司治理論壇 65 第二項 反省小組對於未來歐盟公司法之報告 69 第三項 歐洲模範公司法 70 第四節 與董事會相關之相關指令規範 73 第一項 上市公司應設置非執行業務董事之建議(2005/162/EC) 73 第二項 設置審計委員會之指令(2006/43/EC) 78 第五節 小結 80 第四章 公司組織架構之探討 81 第一節 歐盟公司法之變革對於德國公司治理的衝擊 81 第一項 德國公司法之特色 81 第二項 德國公司現況分析 83 第三項 德國公司法之變遷 87 第四項 股份公司法與公司治理規約 93 第五項 德國近年來針對獨立董事之發展 103 第二節 區分單軌制與雙軌制之必要? 106 第三節 多元存在之體制 110 第一項 歐洲公司規則 110 第二項 比利時 112 第三項 瑞士 114 第四項 法國 117 第四節 獨立董事於各國結構下之發展 119 第五節 小結 122 第五章 結論與建議 125 參考文獻 133 【附錄一】2004年公司治理原則與2015年公司治理原則對照表 146 【附錄二】歐盟各國對於獨立性之要件 161 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 獨立董事 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 獨立性 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 單軌制 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 雙軌制 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 增強型獨立董事 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 控制股東 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Independent Director | en |
| dc.subject | Independence | en |
| dc.subject | One-tier Board | en |
| dc.subject | Two-tier Board | en |
| dc.subject | Enhanced-Independence Director | en |
| dc.subject | Controlling Shareholder | en |
| dc.title | 如何落實我國公司治理獨立性之研究-以歐盟及德國為例 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | A Study of How to Implement the Independence on Corporate Governance-Taking European Union and Germany as an Example | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 106-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 邵慶平,朱德芳 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 獨立董事,獨立性,單軌制,雙軌制,增強型獨立董事,控制股東, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Independent Director,Independence,One-tier Board,Two-tier Board,Enhanced-Independence Director,Controlling Shareholder, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 166 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201803087 | |
| dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2018-08-13 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 法律學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 法律學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 | |
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-107-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 3.78 MB | Adobe PDF |
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。
