Aktieägaravtalets bindande verkan
(2013) LAGF03 20131Department of Law
- Abstract
- The shareholder agreement is a legal occurrence that lacks explicit statutory regulation. Therefore problems may occur in what way these agreements are legally binding upon the parties. This essay examines in which extent certain transfer obligations respectively decision obligations are binding upon the parties.
In company law there is a basic principle that the shares are freely transferable. Exceptions from this principle are only available under certain conditions. Furthermore, the members of the board have an obligation to act in the best interest of the company. With this obligation comes a liability to pay damages. In contract law there are fundamental principles that everyone should have the right to engage in a contract about... (More) - The shareholder agreement is a legal occurrence that lacks explicit statutory regulation. Therefore problems may occur in what way these agreements are legally binding upon the parties. This essay examines in which extent certain transfer obligations respectively decision obligations are binding upon the parties.
In company law there is a basic principle that the shares are freely transferable. Exceptions from this principle are only available under certain conditions. Furthermore, the members of the board have an obligation to act in the best interest of the company. With this obligation comes a liability to pay damages. In contract law there are fundamental principles that everyone should have the right to engage in a contract about anything, and especially that contracts are binding upon the parties. When these basic principles in the respectively branches of law collides, there is no clear answer to the legal situation and how the shareholder agreements are affected.
Deviations from the compulsory purchase regulation should be binding upon the parties, although the shareholder agreement is not binding upon the company. This is because the regulation mainly protects the shareholders themselves. The uncertainty is though greater when it comes to those kinds of decision obligations, which implies that a member of the board, who is also a party to the agreement, should act for any particular, when this is in conflict with the interest of the company. The relevant rules of the company law also protect external stakeholders, e.g. creditors. Furthermore the member of the board in this case can end up in a situation where it does not matter how he acts, because he will become liable to pay damages against either the company or the other parties of the shareholder agreement. Within the legal doctrine there are several different opinions about how these situations should be resolved. Nevertheless it is hard to determine what actually applies under the law and how a judicial proceeding would turn out. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Aktieägaravtalet är en rättslig företeelse som saknar uttrycklig reglering i lag. Problem kan därför uppstå vad gäller avtalens bundenhet mellan parterna. I denna uppsats undersöks i vilken utsträckning vissa överlåtelsebindningar respektive beslutsbindningar är bindande parterna emellan.
Inom associationsrätten finns en grundläggande tanke om att aktier skall vara fritt överlåtbara. Undantag från denna princip får endast göras under vissa förutsättningar. Vidare har styrelseledamöter en skyldighet att verka för bolagets bästa. Denna skyldighet är skadeståndssanktionerad. Inom avtalsrätten finns grundläggande tankar om att man skall få ingå avtal om vad man vill, och framförallt att avtal är bindande. När dessa båda rättsområdens... (More) - Aktieägaravtalet är en rättslig företeelse som saknar uttrycklig reglering i lag. Problem kan därför uppstå vad gäller avtalens bundenhet mellan parterna. I denna uppsats undersöks i vilken utsträckning vissa överlåtelsebindningar respektive beslutsbindningar är bindande parterna emellan.
Inom associationsrätten finns en grundläggande tanke om att aktier skall vara fritt överlåtbara. Undantag från denna princip får endast göras under vissa förutsättningar. Vidare har styrelseledamöter en skyldighet att verka för bolagets bästa. Denna skyldighet är skadeståndssanktionerad. Inom avtalsrätten finns grundläggande tankar om att man skall få ingå avtal om vad man vill, och framförallt att avtal är bindande. När dessa båda rättsområdens grunder kolliderar är det oklart hur man skall lösa problemet, och vad som därmed gäller för aktieägaravtalen.
Det finns mycket som talar för att avsteg från tvångsinlösenreglerna är bindande mellan parterna, även om aktieägaravtalet inte är bindande gentemot bolaget. Detta eftersom regleringen i huvudsak tar sikte på att skydda aktieägarna själva. Större oklarhet råder vad gäller sådana beslutsbindningar som innebär att en styrelseledamot, tillika avtalspart, skall verka för något visst i styrelsen, när detta kommer i konflikt med vad som är det bästa för bolaget. De relevanta associationsrättsliga reglerna skyddar nämligen i stor utsträckning även externa intressenter, t.ex. borgenärer. Dessutom kan styrelseledamoten hamna i en situation där denne blir ersättningsskyldig oavsett vilket beslut som fattas, antingen gentemot bolaget eller gentemot de övriga avtalsparterna. Inom den juridiska doktrinen finns olika åsikter om hur problematiken skall lösas. Det är dock svårt att säga vad som faktiskt utgör gällande rätt, och hur en domstolsprövning av saken hade fallit ut. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/3800473
- author
- Lindström, Marcus LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- The shareholder agreement's binding effect
- course
- LAGF03 20131
- year
- 2013
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- associationsrätt, avtalsrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 3800473
- date added to LUP
- 2013-09-11 14:22:16
- date last changed
- 2013-09-11 14:22:16
@misc{3800473,
abstract = {{The shareholder agreement is a legal occurrence that lacks explicit statutory regulation. Therefore problems may occur in what way these agreements are legally binding upon the parties. This essay examines in which extent certain transfer obligations respectively decision obligations are binding upon the parties.
In company law there is a basic principle that the shares are freely transferable. Exceptions from this principle are only available under certain conditions. Furthermore, the members of the board have an obligation to act in the best interest of the company. With this obligation comes a liability to pay damages. In contract law there are fundamental principles that everyone should have the right to engage in a contract about anything, and especially that contracts are binding upon the parties. When these basic principles in the respectively branches of law collides, there is no clear answer to the legal situation and how the shareholder agreements are affected.
Deviations from the compulsory purchase regulation should be binding upon the parties, although the shareholder agreement is not binding upon the company. This is because the regulation mainly protects the shareholders themselves. The uncertainty is though greater when it comes to those kinds of decision obligations, which implies that a member of the board, who is also a party to the agreement, should act for any particular, when this is in conflict with the interest of the company. The relevant rules of the company law also protect external stakeholders, e.g. creditors. Furthermore the member of the board in this case can end up in a situation where it does not matter how he acts, because he will become liable to pay damages against either the company or the other parties of the shareholder agreement. Within the legal doctrine there are several different opinions about how these situations should be resolved. Nevertheless it is hard to determine what actually applies under the law and how a judicial proceeding would turn out.}},
author = {{Lindström, Marcus}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Aktieägaravtalets bindande verkan}},
year = {{2013}},
}