1
Associate Professor at Law and Political Science Faculty of Allameh Tabatabai University
2
PhD Student of Private Law at Allameh Tabatabai University
Abstract
In 1970s, a movement was shaped in the United States and later in the other parts of the world according to which board of directors of companies not only try to maximize the interests of shareholders, but also to take into account the interests of the others involving in the activities of the company (including manufacturers…). Soon, it was realized that such a stakeholder - oriented theory would not be practical and also enhances something known as "proxy costs". If we limit the activity of the board to increase the capital of shareholders, then this question needs to be raised whether, in the case of non-realization of this purpose by the board, the court may intervene and modify their decision for the interest of the shareholders. If the answer is yes, what is the scope of this intervention? The article also debate if this intervention is compatible with foundation and aims of the law of company.
Arrow, Kenneth.J, The Limits of Organization,W.Norton, New York, 1974.
Bainbridge, Stephen.M, Director Primacy: The Means and Ends of Corporate Governance, Vol.97, Northwestern University Law Review, 2003, pp.547-561.
IV, John.C, Measuring the Domain of Mediating Hierarchy: How Contestable Are U.S. Public Corporations?, 24 Iowa, The Journal of Corporation Law, 1999, pp.837-851.
Gordon, Jeffrey.N, The Rise of Independent Directors in the United States, 1950-2005 Of Shareholder Value and Stock Market Prices, Vol.59, Stanford Law Review, 2007, pp. 465-540.
Hansmann, Henry & Kraakman, Reinier, The End of History for Corporate Law, Vol.89, The Geogetown Law Journal, 2001.
Pasban, Mohammad.R & Campbell, Clare & Birds, John, Section 747 and The Business Judgment Rule, A Comparative Analysis of Company Directors Duties and Liabilities in English and United States Law, Florida State University, Journal Of Transnational Law and Policy, Vol.6, Number.2, Spring.1997.
Rasheed, Abdul.A &Yoshikawa, Toru, The Convergence of Corporate Governance: Promiseand Prospects, Palgrave-MacMillan, 2012.
Sharfman, Bernard.S, Share Holder Wealth Maximization and Its Implementation Under Corporate Law, Florida Law Review, Date Accessed, 8th, jan 2016, (available at: www.ssrn.com).
Ticker, Bob, Corporate Governance, Principles, Policies and Practices, Oxford University Press, 2012.
Zhao, Yuan, Corporate Governance and Director's Independence, kluwer International Publication, 2012.
Pasban,M. and Eskandarzad,S. (2016). "Wealth Maximization" Theory as the Pricnipal Base of Company Law and Scope of Judicial Officials Intervention for it`s Realization. Judgment, 16(87), 1-25.
MLA
Pasban,M. , and Eskandarzad,S. . ""Wealth Maximization" Theory as the Pricnipal Base of Company Law and Scope of Judicial Officials Intervention for it`s Realization", Judgment, 16, 87, 2016, 1-25.
HARVARD
Pasban M., Eskandarzad S. (2016). '"Wealth Maximization" Theory as the Pricnipal Base of Company Law and Scope of Judicial Officials Intervention for it`s Realization', Judgment, 16(87), pp. 1-25.
CHICAGO
M. Pasban and S. Eskandarzad, ""Wealth Maximization" Theory as the Pricnipal Base of Company Law and Scope of Judicial Officials Intervention for it`s Realization," Judgment, 16 87 (2016): 1-25,
VANCOUVER
Pasban M., Eskandarzad S. "Wealth Maximization" Theory as the Pricnipal Base of Company Law and Scope of Judicial Officials Intervention for it`s Realization. Judgment, 2016; 16(87): 1-25.
