!Корпоративное право 2023-2024 / Бойко_диссертация_опублик

281

232.Bahls, S.C. Resolving Shareholder Dissension: Selection of the Appropriate Equitable Remedy // The Journal of Corporation Law. - 1990. – Vol. 15. – P. 286340.

233.Berle, A.A. The Theory of Enterprise Entity // Columbia Law Review. - 1947. - Vol. 47. Issue 3. – P. 343-358.

234.Berle, A.A., Means, G.C. The Modern Corporation and Private Property. New York: Macmillan, 1932. – 380 p.

235.Booth R.A. A Note on Individual Recovery in Derivative Suits // Pepperdine Law Review. - 1989. - Vol. 16. Issue 4. - P. 1025-1044.

236.Boyle, A.J. Minority Shareholders’ Remedies. Cambridge: CUP, 2004. – 168 p.

237.Brudney, V. Dividends, Discretion, and Disclosure // Virginia Law Review. - 1980. – Vol. 66. – P. 85-129.

238.Cheffins, B.R. Company Law: Theory, Structure and Operation. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. - 780 p.

239.Clark, R.C. Corporate Law. 13th ed. New York: Aspen Law & Business, 1986. – 880 p.

240.DeMott, D.A. Beyond Metaphor: An Analysis of Fiduciary Obligation // Duke Law Journal. - 1988. - P. 879 – 924.

241.Easterbrook, F.H., Fischel, D.R. Close Corporations and Agency Costs // Stanford Law Review. - 1986. – Vol. 38. - P. 271-301.

242.Easterbrook, F.H., Fischel, D.R. The Economic Structure of Corporate Law. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991. - 366 p.

243.Eisenberg M. The Legal Roles of Shareholders and Management in Modern Corporate Decision Making // California Law Review. - 1969. – Vol. 57. – P. 1- 181.

244.Fama, E.F., Jensen, M.C. Agency Problems and Residual Claims // Journal of Law and Economics. - 1983. – Vol. 26. – P. 327349.

245.Fama, E.F., Jensen, M.C. Separation of ownership and control // Journal of Law and Economics. - 1983. – Vol. 26. - P. 301-325.

282

246.Furey, N. The Statutory Protection of Minority Shareholders in the United Kingdom // Wake Forest Law Review. - 1987. – Vol. 22. – P. 81-104.

247.Gower, L.C.B. The English Private Company // Law and Contemporary Problems. - 1953. - Vol. 18. – P. 535-545.

248.Grenier, E.J. Prorata Recovery by Shareholders on Corporate' Cauises of Action as a Means of Achieving Corporate Justice // Washington and Lee Law Review. - 1962. - Vol. 19. – P. 165-201.

249.Hetherington, J.A.C. Defining the Scope of Controlling Shareholders Fiduciary Responsibilities // Wake Forest Law Review. - 1987. – Vol. 22. – P. 9-40.

250.Hetherington, J.A.C. The Minority’s Duty of Loyalty in Close Corporations // Duke Law Journal. - 1972. - P. 921-946.

251.Heyman, K.M., Enerio, P.L. The Disappearing Distinction between Derivative and Direct Actions // Delaware Law Review. - 2001. – Vol. 4. – P. 155.

252.Hicks, C.L. Recent Decision. Corporations – Fiduciary Duty – In a Close Corporation, a Majority Shareholder Owes a Fiduciaty Duty Towards the Minority When Seeking a Controlling Share // Mississippi Law Journal. - 1990. - Vol. 60. - P. 425-438.

253.Jensen, M.C., Meckling, W.H. Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure // Journal of Financial Economics. - 1976. - Vol. 3. - P. 305-360.

254.Joffe, V., Drake, D., Richardson, G., Lightman, D., Collingwood, T. Minority Shareholders: Law, Practice, and Procedure. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. – 566 p.

255.Karjala, D.S. An Analysis Of Close Corporation Legislation In The United States // Arizona State Law Journal. - 1989. – Vol. 21. - P. 663.

256.Karmel, R.S. Should a Duty to the Corporation Be Imposed on Institutional Shareholders? // The Business Lawyer. - 2004-2005. – Vol. 60. P. 1-21.

283

257.King, B.W. The Use of Supermajority Voting Rules in Corporate America: Majority Rule, Corporate Legitimacy, and Minority Shareholder Protection // Delaware Journal of Corporate Law. - 1996. - Vol. 21 - P. 895-941.

258.Klausner, M. The Contractarian Theory of Corporate Law: A Generation Later // The Journal of Corporation Law. - 2006. - Vol 31. - P. 779-797.

259.Kleinberger, D.S. Direct Versus Derivative and the Law of Limited Liability Companies // Baylor Law Review. - 2006. – Vol. 58. – P. 64-138.

260.Kleinberger, D.S. Why Not Good Faith? The Foibles of Fairness in the Law of Close Corporation // William Mitchell Law Review. - 1990. – Vol. 16. – P. 11431168.

261.Kleinberger, D.S., Bergmanis I. Direct vs. Derivative, or "What's a Lawsuit Between Friends in an 'Incorporated Partnership'?" // William Mitchell Law Review. - 1996. - Vol. 22. – P. 1204-1279.

262.Leacock, S. J. Close Corporations and Private Companies under American and English Law: Protecting Minorities // Lawyer of the Americas. - 1983. – Vol. 14. –

P.557-574.

263.Lin, J.L.S. Barring Recovery for Diminution in Value of Shares on the Reflective Loss Principle // The Cambridge Law Journal. - 2007. - Vol. 66. No. 3. – P. 537558.

264.Manne H.G. Our Two Corporation System: Law and Economics // Virginia Law Review. - 1967. – Vol. 53. – P. 259-284.

265.Matheson, J.H., Maler, R.K. A Simple Statutory Solution to Minority Oppression in the Closely Held Business // Minnesota Law Review. - 2006-2007. – Vol. 91. –

P.658-709.

266.Mayson, S.W., French, D., Ryan, C.L. Company Law. 33rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016-2017. P. 767.

267.Means, B. A Voice-Based Framework for Evaluating Claims of Minority Shareholder Oppression in the Close Corporation // The Georgetown Law Journal. - 2009. – Vol. 97. – P. 1208-1256.

284

268.Mikkelson, T.S. When Duty Calls: Should the Duty of Majority to Minority Shareholders in Closely Held Corporations Change as a Result of the New Revised Uniform Partnership Act // Mississippi College Law Review. - 2005-2006. – Vol.

25.- P. 171-181.

269.Miller, S.K. Discounts and Buyouts in Minority Investor LLC Valuation Disputes Involving Oppression or Divorce // University of Pennsylvania Journal of Business Law. - 2011. – Vol. 13. - P. 607-683.

270.Miller, S.K. Minority Shareholder Oppression in the Private Company in the European Community: A Comparative Analysis of the German, United Kingdom, and French “Close Corporation Problem” // Cornell International Law Journal. - 1997. – Vol. 30. – P. 381-427.

271.Millon, D. Theories of the Corporation // Duke Law Journal. - 1990. – P. 201-262.

272.Mitchell, C. Shareholders’ Claims for Reflective Loss // Law Quarterly Review. - 2004. - Vol. 120. - P. 457-479.

273.Mitchell, L. E. The Death of Fiduciary Duty in Close Corporations // University of Pennsylvania Law Review. - 1989-1990. – Vol. 138. – P. 1675-1731.

274.Moll, D.K. Minority Oppression & the Limited Liability Company: Learning (or Not) from Close Corporation History // Wake Forest Law Review. - 2005. - Vol.

40.– P. 883-976.

275.Moll, D.K. Reasonable Expectations v. Implied-in-Fact Contracts: Is the Shareholder Oppression Doctrine Needed? // Boston College Law Review. - 2001. – Vol. 42. - P. 989-1080.

276.Moll, D.K. Shareholder Oppression & “Fair Value”: Of Discounts, Dates, and Dastardly Deeds in the Close Corporation // Duke Law Journal. - 2004. – Vol.

54.– P. 293-383.

277.Moll, D.K. Shareholder Oppression & Dividend Policy in the Close Corporation // Washington and Lee Law Review. - 2003. – Vol. 60. – P. 842-924.

285

278.Moll, D.K. Shareholder Oppression in Close Corporations: The Unanswered Question of Perspective // Vanderbilt Law Review. - 2000. – Vol. 53. – P. 749830.

279.Moll, D.K. Shareholder Oppression in Texas Close Corporations: Majority Rule (Still) Isn’t What It Used To Be // Houston Business & Tax Law Journal. - 2008. – Vol. 9. - P. 33-61.

280.Muldoon, R.J. Corporations - Entity Theory - Derivative Actions - Pro Rata Individual Recovery. - Shlensky v. South Parkway Bldg. Corp. // Boston College Law Review. - 1964. - Vol. 5. Issue 3. – P. 773-778.

281.Murdock, C.W. The Evolution of Effective Remedies for Minority Shareholders and Its Impact Upon Valuation of Minority Shares // Notre Dame Law Review. - 1989-1990. – Vol. 65. – P. 425-489.

282.Nagar, V., Petroni, K., Wolfenzon, D. Governance Problems in Close Corporations. 2009. Electronic text data. – Mode of access: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1291612 – Title from screen.

283.Neville M., A statutory buy-out right in SMEs – an important corporate governance mechanism and minority protection? // Nordic & European Company Law Working Paper No. 10-03. Electronic text data. – Mode of access: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1709954 - Title from screen.

284.O’Neal, H.F. Close Corporation Legislation: A Survey and an Evaluation // Duke Law Journal. - 1972. - P. 867-893.

285.O’Neal, H.F. Close Corporations: Existing Legislation and Recommended Reform // The Business Lawyer. - 1977-1978. – Vol. 33. - P. 873-888.

286.O’Neal, H.F. Oppression of Minority Shareholders: Protecting Minority Rights // Cleveland State Law Review. - 1987. – Vol. 35.- P. 121-146.

287.Palm, C.W., Kearney, M.A. A Primer on the Basics of Directors’ Duties in

Delaware: the Rules of the Game (Part I) // Villanova Law Review. - 1995. - Vol. 40 - P. 1297-1364.

286

288.Peeples, R.A. The Use and Misuse of the Business Judgement Rule in the Close Corporation // Notre Dame Law Review. - 1984-1985. – Vol. 60. – P. 456-509.

289.Pinto, A.R. Protection of Close Corporation Minority Shareholders in the United States // The American Journal of Comparative Law. - 2014. – Vol. 62. – P. 361385.

290.Pratt, S.P., Reilly, R.F., Schweihs, R.P. Valuating a Business: The Analysis and Appraisal of Closely Held Companies. 3rd ed. New York: Irwin Professional Pub., 1996. - 850 p.

291.Ragazzo, R.A. Toward a Delaware Common Law of Closely Held Corporations // Washington University Law Quarterly. - 1999. – Vol. 77 – P. 1099-1152.

292.Ribstein, L.E. LLCs: Is the Future Here? A History and Prognosis // Business Law Today. - 2003. – Vol. 13. - P. 11.

293.Ribstein, L.E. The Emergence of the Limited Liability Company // 51 Business Law Today. 1996. P. 1-49.

294.Ribstein, L.E. The Structure of the Fiduciary Relationship // UIllinois Law & Economics Research Paper No. LE03-003. 2003. Electronic text data. – Mode of access: http://papers.ssrn.com/pape.tar?abstract_id=397641 – Title from screen.

295.Schmitthoff, C.M. Clive M. Schmitthoff’s Essays on International Trade Law / Edited by C.-J. Cheng. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Graham & Trotman, 1988. – 802 p.

296.Shapira, G. Shareholder Personal Action in Respect of a Loss Suffered by the Company: The Problem of Overlapping Claims and "Reflective Loss" in English Company Law // The International Lawyer. - 2003. - Vol. 37. Issue 1. – P. 137152.

297.Sheehan, B.R. Business Corporation Law § 626(e): Two-Person Close Corporation Does Not Deter New York Court of Appeals from Steadfast Application of Statutory Rule of Recovery in Shareholder Derivative Suits // St. John's Law Review. - Vol. 65. Issue 2. – P. 624-633.

287

298.Shishido, Z. The Fair Value of Minority Stock in Closely Held Corporations // Fordham Law Review. - 1993. - Vol. 62. - P. 65-110.

299.Smith, G.D. The Critical Resource Theory of Fiduciary Duty // Vanderbilt Law Review. - 2002. - Vol. 55. – P. 1399-1497.

300.Stafford, A., Ritchie, S. Fiduciary Duties: Directors and Employees. Bristol: Jordan Publishing, 2015. – 439 p.

301.Stevens, R.S. Handbook on the law of private corporations. 2d ed. St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1949. - 1125 p.

302.Storm, T.J. Remedies for Oppression of Non-Controlling Shareholders in Illinois Closely-Held Corporations: An Idea Whose Time Has Gone // Loyola University Chicago Law Journal. - 2002. - Vol. 33. - P. 379-441.

303.Tanguay, J.M. Minority Shareholders and Direct Suits in Closely Held Corporations Where Derivative Suits Are Impractical: Durham v. Durham // Pierce Law Review. - 2007. – Vol. 5. – P. 469-492.

304.Thompson, E.J. Direct Harm, Special Injury, or Duty Owed: Which Test Allows for the Most Shareholder Success in Direct Shareholder Litigation? // The Journal of Corporation Law. - 2009. - Vol. 35:1. – P. 215-237.

305.Thompson, R.B. The Shareholder’s Cause of Action for Oppression // The

Business Lawyer. - 1992-1993. – Vol. 48. – P. 699-745.

306.Welch, J.W. Shareholder Individual and Derivative Actions: Underlying Rationales and The Closely Held Corporation // The Journal of Corporation Law. - 1983-1984. - Vol. 9. – P. 147-197.

307.Wells, H. The Rise of the Close Corporation and the Making of Corporation Law // Berkeley Business Law Journal. - 2008. - Vol. 5. - P. 263-316.

308.Wymeersch, E. Comparative Study of the Company Types in Selected EU States, Financial Law Institute Working Paper No. 2008-10. 2008. Electronic text data. – Mode of access: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1285412 – Title from screen.

288

Диссертации и авторефераты диссертаций на соискание ученой степени

кандидата юридических наук:

309.Адамович, Г.Л. Обеспечение интересов меньшинства акционеров в праве России и Европейского Союза: дис. … канд. юрид. наук / Адамович Геннадий Леонидович. - М., 2002. – 137 с.

310.Аппакова, Т.А. Защита прав участников хозяйственных обществ: дис. ... канд.

юрид. наук / Аппакова Татьяна Анатольевна. - Владивосток, 2011. – 238 с.

311.Асташкина Е.Ю. Гражданско-правовые способы защиты прав акционеров в России: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Асташкина Елена Юрьевна. - Ставрополь,

2003. – 190 с.

312.Белоножкин, А.Ю. Содержание и формы злоупотребления субъективным гражданским правам: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Белоножкин Андрей Юрьевич. - Волгоград, 2005. - 206 с.

313.Емцева, И.А. Защита корпоративных прав в российском гражданском праве:

дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Емцева Инна Александровна. - Саратов, 2004. – 194

с.

314.Глухова, Т.В. Защита прав участников хозяйственных обществ в законодательстве России и Европейского Союза: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук /

Глухова Татьяна Владимировна. - Волгоград, 2011. – 189 с.

315.Забитов, К.С. Гражданско-правовое регулирование принудительного выкупа ценных бумаг миноритарных акционеров по требованию контролирующего акционера: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Забитов Керим Саидович. – М., 2012. –

179 с.

316.Ивлиев, Р.Ю. Пределы осуществления прав акционеров: автореф. дис. канд.

юрид. наук / Ивлиев Роман Юрьевич. - М., 2007. - 34 с.

317.Ивлиев, Р.Ю. Пределы осуществления прав акционеров: дис. ... канд. юрид.

наук / Ивлиев Роман Юрьевич. - М., 2007. - 215 с.

289

318.Избрехт, П.А. Злоупотребление гражданскими правами в сфере предпринимательской деятельности: дис ... канд. юрид. наук / Избрехт Павел Александрович. - Екатеринбург, 2005. - 198 с.

319.Колесов, А.П. Гражданско-правовые способы защиты корпоративных прав и интересов: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Колесов Антон Павлович. - Тверь, 2008.

– 172 с.

320.Кудачкин, A.A. Корпорация в США и акционерное общество в России как субъекты акционерного правоотношения (сравнительно-правовой анализ):

дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Кудачкин Антон Алексеевич. - М., 2007. – 186 с.

321.Кузнецов, А.А. Злоупотребление правом в правоотношениях между акционером и акционерным обществом: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Кузнецов Александр Анатольевич. - Самара, 2012. – 173 с.

322.Никологорская, Е.И. Гражданско-правовая характеристика интересов акционеров и акционерного общества и их баланса: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук /

Никологорская Екатерина Ивановна. - М., 2008. – 186 с.

323.Нор-Аревян, К.Л. Основные права акционеров и их гражданско-правовая защита: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Нор-Аревян Каринэ Лузьяновна. - Ростов-

на-Дону, 2007 – 180 с.

324.Овод, И.В. Товарищества по гражданскому праву: автореф. дис. канд. юрид.

наук / Овод Игорь Викторович. - Казань, 2006. – 24 с.

325.Петникова, О.В. Права участников корпоративных отношений по праву Великобритании: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Петникова Ольга Валерьевна. -

М., 2007. – 189 с.

326.Рудая, В.В. Защита прав акционеров: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Рудая Виктория Владимировна. - М., 2009. – 206 с.

327.Русанова, В.А. Корпоративные способы защиты прав участников

Русанова Вероника Александровна. - М., 2012. – 222 c.

290

328.Савельев, А.Б. Договор простого товарищества в российском гражданском праве: автореф. дис. канд. юрид. наук / Савельев Алексей Борисович. -

Москва, 2003. – 30 с.

329.Тимаева, И.А. Злоупотребление правом в корпоративных отношениях:

вопросы квалификации, способы гражданско-правовой защиты: дис … канд.

юрид. наук / Тимаева Ирина Альбертовна. - Казань, 2007. - 185 с.

330.Токарев, Д.А. Злоупотребление правом в хозяйственных обществах: условия возникновения и способы защиты: автореф. дис. канд. юрид. наук / Токарев Дмитрий Анатольевич. - Волгоград, 2010. – 30 c.

331.Фалеев, В.В. Миноритарные акционеры: статус, права и их осуществление:

дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Фалеев Виталий Викторович. - М., 2009. – 229 с.

332.Шлыкова, Т.А. Права участников общества с ограниченной ответственностью: юридическая природа, понятие, виды: дис. ... канд. юрид.

наук / Шлыкова Татьяна Александровна. - . М., 2005. – 169 с.

333.Юрченко, Н.А. Защита гражданских прав участников хозяйственных обществ: дис. ... канд. юрид. наук / Юрченко Надежда Александровна. -

Екатеринбург, 2004. – 176 с.

334.Ястребов, И.С. Гражданско-правовое регулирование отношений,

возникающих их договора простого товарищества: автореф. дис. канд. юрид.

наук / Ястребов Илья Сергеевич. – М., 2007. - 26 с.

Интернет-ресурсы:

335.http://www.e-disclosure.ru/vse-novosti/novost/2425

336.http://vz.ru/economy/2010/8/6/423691.html

337.http://www.arbitr.ru/_upimg/DB8BC5ED63588571B153E6FF048B620D_po st_plen1.pdf%20