Search

The aim of this paper is to identify the persons who legally qualify as related parties for the purposes of applying the new rules on related-party transactions introduced in the Capital Companies Law by Law 5/2021 transposing Directive 2017/828. Although the study focuses on the analysis of the related parties perimeter in listed companies, it also extensively addresses, by contrast or comparison, the identification of the related parties (to directors) in the general part of the Capital Companies Law, applicable to any type of capital company. The goal sought is to translate the complicated accounting language of the international accounting standards referred to in the special part into the common corporate language and, as far as possible, to harmonize to its dictates the treatment of the matter in the general part. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Outlining the legal notion of professional company and, thereby, the subject matter of the Professional Companies Law is no doubt one of the most controversial issues involved in the practical implementation of said legislation and one of the most nebulous areas of companies law at present. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to its understanding by harmonising, to the extent feasible, the requirements of both practical reason and legal reason. It advocates the necessity of delineating the legal notion by reference to a specific, empirical type of company based on «working community» and characterised by the insiders’ (i.e. the professional shareholders’) own-disperse or decentralised-production, ownership and authority. This provides a basis to reject both the freedom of choice theory, as promoted by the «Dirección General de los Registros y el Notariado», and the Supreme Court’s restricted activity theory, and to propound the professional contribution theory instead. It is the author’s view that the relevant legislation can only be comprehended or understood if interpreted under the light of this hypothesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the severity of the problem entailed by private benefits extraction in the corporate arena and, from there, underscores the need to fortify the legal treatment of the duty of loyalty of directors, where the author places the very heart of any meaningful corporate law. Following this examination, the author proceeds to identify the principal insufficiencies or imperfections that have traditionally beleaguered our legal framework and assesses the measures implemented by the recently adopted Law 31/2014 (amending the Companies Act to improve corporate governance) to mitigate them. This exercise enables the fundamental aspects of the duty of loyalty to be dissected, thereby revealing the basic structure of the new regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to assess the issue regarding the validity of shareholders' agreements, substantive mandatoriness needs to be distinguished from typological mandatoriness. The author holds the view that only the former limits parties' free will in shareholders' agreements. In other words, any shareholders' agreement that diverges from typological mandatoriness should not be criticised from a legal perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

El artículo presenta el discurso pronunciado por Cándido Paz-Ares, en el Acto en homenaje al Profesor Rafael del Águila, celebrado en la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid el día 20 de mayo de 2009. Entre los aspectos principales se destacan algunas anécdotas sobre la vida del homenajeado, y su labor en el mundo de la Academia.

El artículo se centra sobre la vida y obra de Aurelio Menéndez, miembro de la revista "Derecho Comercial". Los diversos temas relacionados incluyen las leyes comerciales del siglo XXI, las reformas introducidas en las leyes, los premios que recibió de las sociedades científicas y sus discípulos de auto mejoramiento.