Sakrättsliga frågor vid överlåtelse av aktier i kupongbolag
(2017) JURM02 20171Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Kupongbolaget särskiljer sig från avstämningsbolag på huvudsakligen två vis. I ett kupongbolag får aktiebrev ges ut, och bolaget för aktieboken på egen hand. Aktiebrevet fungerar dels som en sorts legitimation gentemot bolaget, där innehav utav ett aktiebrev innebär att dess innehavare ska presumeras vara aktieägare. Aktieboken å sin sida är bolagets register över vilka som innehar aktier i bolaget. Båda tjänar till att en aktieägare ska få utöva sina rättigheter i bolaget.
För att en förvärvare av aktier ska erhålla sakrättsligt skydd för sitt förvärv, dels mot en eventuell tidigare förvärvare och dels mot överlåtarens borgenärer, erfordrar lagstiftningen att aktiebrevet traderas. Enligt sakrättsliga principer innebär detta att... (More) - Kupongbolaget särskiljer sig från avstämningsbolag på huvudsakligen två vis. I ett kupongbolag får aktiebrev ges ut, och bolaget för aktieboken på egen hand. Aktiebrevet fungerar dels som en sorts legitimation gentemot bolaget, där innehav utav ett aktiebrev innebär att dess innehavare ska presumeras vara aktieägare. Aktieboken å sin sida är bolagets register över vilka som innehar aktier i bolaget. Båda tjänar till att en aktieägare ska få utöva sina rättigheter i bolaget.
För att en förvärvare av aktier ska erhålla sakrättsligt skydd för sitt förvärv, dels mot en eventuell tidigare förvärvare och dels mot överlåtarens borgenärer, erfordrar lagstiftningen att aktiebrevet traderas. Enligt sakrättsliga principer innebär detta att överlåtarens rådighet över aktiebrevet behöver upphöra. Bekymmer uppstår emellertid när ett aktiebrev inte kan traderas. De två situationer som här berörts är dels att aktiebrevet är förlorat, och dels att aktiebrev ej har utgivits.
I det fall aktiebrevet har förlorats kan en förvärvare inte få sakrättsligt skydd för sitt förvärv förrän aktiebrevet har genomgått ett dödningsförfarande som tar åtminstone ett år. I det fall aktiebrev ej har utgivits är svaret något oklart. Troligtvis kan en förvärvare i så fall med stor sannolikhet få sakrättsligt skydd genom att bolagets styrelse underrättas om förvärvet. Detta antagande kan emellertid utmanas mot bakgrund av lagstiftarens tystnad i frågan. Emellertid framstår en sådan lösning mot bakgrund av motiv till SkbrL och 1944 års aktiebolagslag samt denuntiationsprincipens bakomliggande principer som väldigt trolig och välfungerande. (Less) - Abstract
- Companies that are not central securities depository (CSD) companies are known as “kupongbolag” and were until the 1970’s the only sort of limited company in Sweden. Companies that are not CSD companies differ from CSD companies in two main ways. A company that is not a CSD company can issue stock certificates, and the company is responsible for the running of its share register. The share certificate functions as a means for the shareholder be identified as such, where possession of the share certificate means that the possessor is to be presumed to be a shareholder. The share register on the other hand is the company’s registry of its shareholders. Both serve as a means for the shareholder to exercise his or her rights regarding the... (More)
- Companies that are not central securities depository (CSD) companies are known as “kupongbolag” and were until the 1970’s the only sort of limited company in Sweden. Companies that are not CSD companies differ from CSD companies in two main ways. A company that is not a CSD company can issue stock certificates, and the company is responsible for the running of its share register. The share certificate functions as a means for the shareholder be identified as such, where possession of the share certificate means that the possessor is to be presumed to be a shareholder. The share register on the other hand is the company’s registry of its shareholders. Both serve as a means for the shareholder to exercise his or her rights regarding the company.
For an acquirer to obtain property rights for the acquisition, regarding both a possible second acquirer and the transferor’s creditors, the law requires the share certificate to be executed to the acquirer. In accordance with the principles of property rights this means that transferor’s control of the share certificate must cease. Issues might arise when a share certificate cannot be executed. The two in regards to this question relevant situations are in part when a share certificate has been lost, and in part when a share certificate has not been issued.
In case of the share certificate being lost an acquirer of the shares cannot gain property rights of the shares until the lost share certificate has gone through a mortification procedure that takes at least one year. In case a share certificate has not been issued the question becomes more difficult. An acquirer can most probably obtain property rights of the shares if the company’s board is notified of the transaction. This assumption can however be challenged on basis of the legislators’ lack of answers. Such a solution does however seem reasonable and well-functioning when looking at both the preparatory work of the relevant legislation and the purposes of denuntiation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8909142
- author
- Högstedt, Fredrik LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Property rights issues regarding transactions of shares in non-CSD companies
- course
- JURM02 20171
- year
- 2017
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Associationsrätt, förmögenhetsrätt, sakrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8909142
- date added to LUP
- 2017-06-26 15:14:23
- date last changed
- 2017-06-26 15:14:23
@misc{8909142,
abstract = {{Companies that are not central securities depository (CSD) companies are known as “kupongbolag” and were until the 1970’s the only sort of limited company in Sweden. Companies that are not CSD companies differ from CSD companies in two main ways. A company that is not a CSD company can issue stock certificates, and the company is responsible for the running of its share register. The share certificate functions as a means for the shareholder be identified as such, where possession of the share certificate means that the possessor is to be presumed to be a shareholder. The share register on the other hand is the company’s registry of its shareholders. Both serve as a means for the shareholder to exercise his or her rights regarding the company.
For an acquirer to obtain property rights for the acquisition, regarding both a possible second acquirer and the transferor’s creditors, the law requires the share certificate to be executed to the acquirer. In accordance with the principles of property rights this means that transferor’s control of the share certificate must cease. Issues might arise when a share certificate cannot be executed. The two in regards to this question relevant situations are in part when a share certificate has been lost, and in part when a share certificate has not been issued.
In case of the share certificate being lost an acquirer of the shares cannot gain property rights of the shares until the lost share certificate has gone through a mortification procedure that takes at least one year. In case a share certificate has not been issued the question becomes more difficult. An acquirer can most probably obtain property rights of the shares if the company’s board is notified of the transaction. This assumption can however be challenged on basis of the legislators’ lack of answers. Such a solution does however seem reasonable and well-functioning when looking at both the preparatory work of the relevant legislation and the purposes of denuntiation.}},
author = {{Högstedt, Fredrik}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Sakrättsliga frågor vid överlåtelse av aktier i kupongbolag}},
year = {{2017}},
}