DOCSLIB.ORG

Limited Liability: a Pathway for Corporate Recklessness?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Limited Liability: a Pathway for Corporate Recklessness? LIMITED LIABILITY: A PATHWAY FOR CORPORATE RECKLESSNESS? Igho Lordson Dabor PhD SEPTEMBER 2016 LIMITED LIABILITY: A PATHWAY FOR CORPORATE RECKLESSNESS? By Igho Lordson Dabor A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement of the University of Wolverhampton for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September, 2016 Faculty of Social Sciences University of Wolverhampton Law School This work or any part therefore has not previously been presented in any form to the University or any other body whether for the purposes of assessment, publication or for any other purposes (unless otherwise indicated). Save for any express acknowledgements, references and/or bibliographies cited in the work, I confirm that the intellectual content of this work is the result of my own efforts and of no other person. The right of Igho Lordson Dabor to be identified as author of this work is asserted in accordance with ss.77 and 78 of the Copyright, Design and Patents Act 1988. At this date, the author owns copyright. Signature: …………………………………………… Igho Lordson Dabor Date: …………………………………………………. Dedication DEDICATION I dedicate this work first of all to the Almighty God, creator of heaven and earth, who has been my rock, my strength, and my salvation and to my lovely wife Mrs Adefolawe Yetunde Dabor and our lovely and wonderful children Joshua Omoyode Dabor, and Esther Avwerosuoghene Dabor. Dedication i Acknowledgement ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I extend my gratitude to the almighty God who gave me the grace, and ability to complete this work. I also extend my gratitude to all in the University Of Wolverhampton Law School who provided a fantastic environment in which to work and learn. Undertaking this research was difficult but became manageable through the environment you created. A special note of thanks must go to my Supervisors, Professor Stephen Griffin, who retired during my third year, Professor Peter Walton, and Dr Kimberley Barker for their insightful comments and encouragement along the way – thank you! For your support in this entire endeavour. Special thanks must also go to Mr Gregory Allan, who left the University before the completion of this work, for his suggestions and support during this work. I also would like to thank my family, especially my parents Mr and Mrs Sam Dabor, my aunty and her husband, Mr and Mrs Christopher Unuigbe, my brother Mr Cyril Dabor, and my sister Mrs Pamela Umunna. Special thanks also go to my in-laws Mr and Mrs Eyitayo Akinyandenu, Mr Adeniyi Akinyandenu, Mr Segun Akinyandenu and Miss Toyin Akinyandenu – thank you all! For your enormous support and prayers throughout this work. My most profound appreciation and utmost love go to my wife Mrs Adefolawe Yetunde Dabor – my Pepperless! Thank you for your love, care, support, sacrifice, perseverance and prayers throughout this daunting task. To our lovely and wonderful children Joshua Omoyode Dabor, and Esther Avwerosuoghene Dabor, thank you for your lovely smiles; it would not be the same without you. P a g e ii | 274 Abstract ABSTRACT This thesis argues that the twin concept of separate personality and limited liability from its historical beginnings, has entrenched corporate irresponsibility. It assesses the role that these concepts have played in tackling corporate irresponsibility from their historical origins to the present day, commenting on the lessons learnt. Whilst the institution of the company as a legal person is unquestionably the bedrock of modern company law,1 this thesis examines these concepts not necessarily from the position of disputing the philosophical, economic, or political imperatives, all of which are incredibly important – but from the viewpoint that historically, the principle of separate personality and limited liability entrenches corporate irresponsibility. As such, this thesis suggests a partial abandonment of the separate personality principle because it provides a mechanism for dishonest directors to escape liability for their fraudulent conduct. It also argues that the existing judicial evasion and concealment2 principles and the statutory fraudulent and wrongful trading provisions under the Insolvency Act 19863 are too restrictive, and ambiguous in combating corporate abuse. It is concluded that the existing common law and statutory rules geared towards combating abuse of limited liability provides no coherent format upon which the courts and legislature may effectively curb abuse of the corporate form. As such, these laws in light of their inability to make dishonest directors personally liable for their fraudulent conducts ought to be challenged. There is a need to challenge the existing rules in order to show the effect abuse of limited liability has on creditors, the public and the economy. This research indicates that there ought to be an adequate and effective alternative law which provides balance and support for genuine enterprise whilst providing a robust system whereby those who abuse the corporate form can be easily made liable for corporate debts. 1 Salomon v A Salomon [1897] AC 22. 2 Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34; [2013] 3 WLR 1. 3 Section 213 and 214. P a g e iii | 274 TABLE of CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ....................................................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..................................................................................................... ii ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................... iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................................... iv LIMITED LIABILITY AND CORPORATE RECKLESSNESS ......................................... 1 I. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 II. Research Aims ........................................................................................................................ 3 III. Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 4 IV. Scope of the Work ................................................................................................................. 5 V. Overview of Chapters ............................................................................................................. 5 CHAPTER 1 .......................................................................................................................... 1 THE UK HISTORY OF LIMITED LIABILITY 1400 -1671 .............................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.1.1 Limited or Unlimited Liability ........................................................................................ 1 1.2 The origins of the concept of limited liability in Roman Times ............................................ 2 1.3 The Societas as modern form of business in Roman Times .................................................. 4 1.4 Limitation of Liability in Ancient Rome ............................................................................... 5 1.5 Early forms of the corporation in England ............................................................................ 6 1.6 Commenda ........................................................................................................................... 10 1.7 Chartered Companies in England ........................................................................................ 13 1.7.1 Characteristics of the Chartered Company ................................................................... 14 1.7.2 Development of Joint Stock Corporations .................................................................... 16 1.8 Traces of Limited Liability in Chartered Companies .......................................................... 18 P a g e iv | 274 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.8.1 Reasons for the shareholder exclusion from the bankruptcy law in respect of some chartered companies ............................................................................................................... 22 1.8.2 Attempts to make insolvent corporations liable for corporate debts ............................ 24 1.8.3 Preventing corporate abuse through the Writ of Distringas? ....................................... 25 1.8.4 Move towards the unlimited liability of company shareholders ................................... 27 1.9 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 31 CHAPTER 2 ........................................................................................................................ 33 THE GROWTH AND DANGERS IN THE CORPORATE FORM IN THE 1700 AND 1800S AND THE EMERGENCE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CONCEPT OF LIMITED LIABILITY ......................................................................................................................... 33 2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 33 2.2 Setting the stage for the South Sea Bubble: The Sword Blade Company and the Bank of England .....................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Duty of UK Company Directors to Consider Relevant ESG Factors
    The Duty of UK Company Directors to Consider Relevant ESG Factors Disclaimer This memorandum is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Neither the PRI Association nor Debevoise & Plimpton, nor any of their respective agents, partners or employees, takes any responsibility for any action taken or not taken on the basis of anything contained in this memorandum. Specific legal advice should always be sought. This memorandum, which is based upon the law as at August 2019, is deliberately abbreviated and summary in nature. Unless expressly stated otherwise, the opinions, recommendations, findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this report are those of the various contributors to the report and do not necessarily represent the views of PRI Association or the signatories to the Principles for Responsible Investment. Any recommendations or summaries made by the PRI Association based on the content of this memorandum should not be taken to have been endorsed by Debevoise & Plimpton. Debevoise & Plimpton Debevoise & Plimpton LLP is a premier law firm with market-leading practices and a global perspective. Approximately 700 lawyers work in nine offices across three continents, within integrated global practices, serving clients around the world. The Debevoise Private Equity Group is a genuine market leader and has helped shape the industry for decades. More than 200 lawyers work within the Group in Debevoise offices around the world, making it one of the few truly global private equity practices. The team works hand-in-hand with our Business Integrity Group, designing and integrating solutions to complex corporate responsibility challenges. We work with in-house counsel, sustainability leaders and compliance departments to provide guidance on emerging integrity standards.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 Lifting the Veil
    3 Lifting the veil SUMMARY Introduction Statutory examples Veil lifting by the courts Classical veil lifting, 1897–1966 The interventionist years, 1966–1989 Back to basics, 1989–present Tortious liability Parent company personal injury tortious liability Commercial tort The costs/bene? ts of limited liability Introduction 3.1 You may not unnaturally wonder at this point what the phrase ‘lifting the veil’ is about. It refers to the situations where the judiciary or the legislature have decided that the separation of the personality of the company and the members is not to be maintained. 7 e veil of incorporation is thus said to be lifted. 7 e judiciary in particular seem to love using unhelpful metaphors to describe this process. In the course of reading cases in this area you will fi nd the process variously described as ‘lifting’, ‘peeping’, ‘penetrating’, ‘piercing’ or ‘parting’ the veil of incorporation. In a nutshell, having spent the whole of the last chapter emphasising the separateness of corporate personality, we now turn to those situations where for various reasons that separateness is not maintained. BBookook 77a.indba.indb 3311 88/14/2008/14/2008 99:08:31:08:31 PPMM 32 | Lifting the veil 3.2 While some of the examples of veil lifting involve straightforward shareholder lim- itation of liability issues many of the examples involve corporate group structures. As businesses became more adept at using the corporate form, group structures began to emerge. For example Z Ltd (the parent or holding company) owns all the issued share capital in three other companies—A Ltd, B Ltd and C Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • SUMMARY Introduction the Fiduciary Position of Directors to Whom Do Directors Owe T
    14 Directors’ duties <start feature> SUMMARY Introduction The fiduciary position of directors To whom do directors owe their duties? The general duties of directors: CA 2006, Part 10 Remedies Accessory liability Relief from liability <end feature> Introduction 14.1 In this chapter we consider the duties which a director owes to the company. In Chapter 13 we explained that directors are fiduciaries and so much of the case law on their duties is founded on principles originating from the law of trusts and agency. We also saw that the early part of the 20th century marked a significant shift in the way the judges viewed the office of director. In tandem with this development the courts adopted a stricter approach towards the standard of care and skill expected of directors in the performance of their management roles. A concern of both equity and common law courts was to develop a corpus of rules designed to prevent directors abusing their considerable powers. The policy objective is based on prophylaxis and the result is a formidable body of reported decisions in which the judges have been developing the contours of directors’ liabilities. In addition to the work of the courts, legislation has also imposed a range of duties, devised principally as reactive measures against specific abuses by directors, particularly in relation to fraudulent asset stripping. Confronted with this considerable body of law, it came as little surprise that the Company Law Review (CLR), in line with its objectives of maximising clarity and accessibility, recommended that the duties of directors should be codified by way of a 1 statutory restatement.
    [Show full text]
  • CCAR Journal the Reform Jewish Quarterly
    CCAR Journal The Reform Jewish Quarterly Halachah and Reform Judaism Contents FROM THE EDITOR At the Gates — ohrgJc: The Redemption of Halachah . 1 A. Brian Stoller, Guest Editor ARTICLES HALACHIC THEORY What Do We Mean When We Say, “We Are Not Halachic”? . 9 Leon A. Morris Halachah in Reform Theology from Leo Baeck to Eugene B . Borowitz: Authority, Autonomy, and Covenantal Commandments . 17 Rachel Sabath Beit-Halachmi The CCAR Responsa Committee: A History . 40 Joan S. Friedman Reform Halachah and the Claim of Authority: From Theory to Practice and Back Again . 54 Mark Washofsky Is a Reform Shulchan Aruch Possible? . 74 Alona Lisitsa An Evolving Israeli Reform Judaism: The Roles of Halachah and Civil Religion as Seen in the Writings of the Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism . 92 David Ellenson and Michael Rosen Aggadic Judaism . 113 Edwin Goldberg Spring 2020 i CONTENTS Talmudic Aggadah: Illustrations, Warnings, and Counterarguments to Halachah . 120 Amy Scheinerman Halachah for Hedgehogs: Legal Interpretivism and Reform Philosophy of Halachah . 140 Benjamin C. M. Gurin The Halachic Canon as Literature: Reading for Jewish Ideas and Values . 155 Alyssa M. Gray APPLIED HALACHAH Communal Halachic Decision-Making . 174 Erica Asch Growing More Than Vegetables: A Case Study in the Use of CCAR Responsa in Planting the Tri-Faith Community Garden . 186 Deana Sussman Berezin Yoga as a Jewish Worship Practice: Chukat Hagoyim or Spiritual Innovation? . 200 Liz P. G. Hirsch and Yael Rapport Nursing in Shul: A Halachically Informed Perspective . 208 Michal Loving Can We Say Mourner’s Kaddish in Cases of Miscarriage, Stillbirth, and Nefel? . 215 Jeremy R.
    [Show full text]
  • Directors Duties and Liabilities Under Cayman Islands Law Article
    October 2012 Company Directors: Duties and Liability in Cayman Islands Law For further information Duties and liabilities of directors of companies in the Cayman Islands are on any of the issues discussed in determined by legislation in the Companies Law (Revised) and by the this article please contact: Common Law from which precedents are established. Some of the Common Law principles are incorporated in statute and legal precedents evolve over time as new cases are tried before the Grand Court, Court of Appeal and the Privy Council. Statutory Duties of Company Directors The Companies Law (2011 Revision) lists the duties and requirements of company directors: • To maintain a register of company members with their names and addresses and in the case of a company having its capital divided Lorcan Tiernan DD: + 353 (0)1 673 1736 into shares, a statement of the shares held by each member, at the [email protected] registered office of the company in the Cayman Islands. (This provision does not apply to the register of exempted companies which can be kept at any location). • To maintain a register of directors. The Registrar of Companies shall be notified of any change in directors or officers within 30 days. Failure to comply with the notification gives rise to a penalty of CI$10 for every day during which the default continues. The penalty applies to every director and manager who knowingly and willfully authorises or permits such default. • A register of mortgages and charges over company assets must be kept at the registered office of the company.
    [Show full text]
  • January–June 2013
    Index January–June 2013 CONTENTS Subject Index 2 UK Statutes 14 Statutory Instruments 16 International Legislation 17 Law Reports 18 Table of Cases 19 Author Index 28 Book Reviews 30 Glossary 31 2 SUBJECT INDEX January—June 2013 | www.newlawjournal.co.uk Numbers in bold refer to issue seat of arbitration sufficiently indicated by silk convicted of tax fraud 7548:149 numbers, followed by page numbers the country chosen as the place of CAS refers to the Charities Appeals arbitration (law digest) 7550:237 Supplement sensitive approach shown to divorce C following Jewish arbitration (law in the headlines) 7548:153 charities A third party to arbitration agreement call for law firms to support Workplace (law digest) 7557:18 Giving 7550:221 abuse of process architects Charitable Incorporated former wife’s claim was abuse of process 7560:4 removal of architect’s name from register Organisations CAS(Summer):16 access to justice (law report) 7558:16 criminal record checks are undergoing significant access to justice debate (comment) 7543:7 armed forces changes CAS(Summer):8–9 age families of improperly equipped soldiers impact key measures in the latest budget may former partner in law firm loses age to be allowed to bring claims for have on charities CAS(Summer):5 discrimination claim 7563:4 their deaths 7566:5 pension deficit risk CAS(Summer):17 alcohol immigration of dependent adult children plans to transform the rehabilitation some of history’s most infamous and often of Gurkhas (law digest) 7546:107 agenda offer opportunities for tragic tipplers
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of English Company Law Before 1900
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Turner, John D. Working Paper The development of English company law before 1900 QUCEH Working Paper Series, No. 2017-01 Provided in Cooperation with: Queen's University Centre for Economic History (QUCEH), Queen's University Belfast Suggested Citation: Turner, John D. (2017) : The development of English company law before 1900, QUCEH Working Paper Series, No. 2017-01, Queen's University Centre for Economic History (QUCEH), Belfast This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/149911 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu QUCEH WORKING PAPER SERIES http://www.quceh.org.uk/working-papers THE DEVELOPMENT OF ENGLISH COMPANY LAW BEFORE 1900 John D.
    [Show full text]
  • Enumerating Old Themes? Berle’S Concept of Ownership and the Historical Development of English Company Law in Context
    Enumerating Old Themes? Berle’s Concept of Ownership and the Historical Development of English Company Law in Context Lorraine E. Talbot† I. INTRODUCTION Neither the claims of ownership nor those of control can stand against the paramount interests of the community. It remains only for the claims of the community to be put forward with clarity and force.1 This radical statement encapsulates one of the key themes of Adolf Berle’s work: stockholders no longer had a role in the corporation that entitled them to extensive claims in the corporation. Heralded in The Modern Corporation, his reconceptualization of the nature of ownership in the context of shareholding was based on empirical data on the mas- sive level of share dispersal in America’s largest corporations.2 Stock- holders had become too numerous and too dispersed to exercise control over “their” corporation. Instead, managers—the paid employees of the company—controlled the corporations. In this new arrangement, where business was dominated by management-controlled organizations as op- posed to owner-controlled organizations—a shift dubbed by Berle as a “revolution”3—new guiding principles for corporations needed to be drawn. In this new corporate order the state was required to take the lead to achieve a morally correct balance of interests, a balance which rele- † Associate Professor of Law, Warwick University, U.K. This paper is the first of two free-standing papers; the forthcoming paper will show how the marginalization of shareholder interests was only briefly achieved through wider social reforms and did not necessarily result from shifts in ownership and control.
    [Show full text]
  • Diasporas, Development and Peacemaking in the Horn of Africa Edited by Liisa Laakso and Petri Hautaniemi
    This PDF is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) Licence. Further details regarding permitted usage can be found at http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Print and ebook editions of this work are available to purchase from Zed Books (www.zedbooks.co.uk). A frica Now Africa Now is published by Zed Books in association with the inter­ nationally respected Nordic Africa Institute. Featuring high­quality, cutting­edge research from leading academics, the series addresses the big issues confronting Africa today. Accessible but in­depth, and wide­ranging in its scope, Africa Now engages with the critical political, economic, sociological and development debates affecting the continent, shedding new light on pressing concerns. Nordic Africa Institute The Nordic Africa Institute (Nordiska Afrikainstitutet) is a centre for research, documentation and information on modern Africa. Based in Uppsala, Sweden, the Institute is dedicated to providing timely, critical and alternative research and analysis of Africa and to co­operation with African researchers. As a hub and a meeting place for a growing field of research and analysis, the Institute strives to put knowledge of African issues within reach of scholars, policy makers, politicians, media, students and the general public. The Institute is financed jointly by the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden). www.nai.uu.se Forthcoming titles Margaret C. Lee (ed.), Africa’s World Trade Godwin Murunga, Duncan Okello and Anders Sjögren (eds), Kenya: The Struggle for a New Constitutional Order Thiven Reddy, South Africa: Beyond Apartheid and Liberal Democracy Lisa Åkesson and Maria Eriksson Baaz (eds), Africa’s Return Migrants Titles already published Fantu Cheru and Cyril Obi (eds), The Rise of China and India in Africa Ilda Lindell (ed.), Africa’s Informal Workers Iman Hashim and Dorte Thorsen, Child Migration in Africa Prosper B.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Huddersfield Repository
    University of Huddersfield Repository Mendelsohn, James Still "the unyielding rock"? A critical assessment of the ongoing importance of Salomon V Salomon & Co LTD[1897] AC 22 in the light of selected English company law cases Original Citation Mendelsohn, James (2012) Still "the unyielding rock"? A critical assessment of the ongoing importance of Salomon V Salomon & Co LTD[1897] AC 22 in the light of selected English company law cases. Masters thesis, University of Huddersfield. This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/23331/ The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of the University, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the items on this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners. Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided: • The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy; • A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and • The content is not changed in any way. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/ STILL ―THE UNYIELDING ROCK?‖ A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE ONGOING IMPORTANCE OF SALOMON V SALOMON & CO LTD [1897] AC 22 IN THE LIGHT
    [Show full text]
  • December 2013
    Index January – December 2013 CONTENTS Subject Index 2 UK Statutes 26 Statutory Instruments 28 International Legislation 29 Law Reports 32 Table of Cases 34 Author Index 52 Book and Online Reviews 56 Glossary 56 2 SUBJECT INDEX www.newlawjournal.co.uk | January – December Index 2013 | New Law Journal Numbers in bold refer to issue use of ADR to resolve landlord and how courts deal with question of costs numbers, followed by page numbers tenant disputes (ADR) 7573:21 where an arbitration award is being CAS refers to the who pays the mediator (judicial line) 7557:19 challenged 7554:14–15 Charities Appeals Supplement America jurisdiction of High Court under American Bar Association and external Arbitration Act 1969 (law digest) 7565:29 ownership of law firms (comment) 7588:8 local court is free to impose its own A American Bar Association to permit procedural conditions (law digest) 7583:17 foreign lawyers to practise as in- negative aspect of a London arbitration abuse of process house counsel 7549:182 (law digest) 7565:29 former wife’s claim was abuse of process 7560:4 animals points needed to succeed under s.68 access to justice dangerous dogs and destruction orders Arbitration Act 1996 (law digest) 7581:29 access to justice debate (comment) 7543:7 (law digest) 7588:21 seat of arbitration sufficiently indicated age anti-social behaviour by the country chosen as the place former partner in law firm loses age proposals in new legislation to of arbitration (law digest) 7550:237 discrimination claim 7563:4 introduce statutory injunctions
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of the Joint Stock Company to 1800: a Study of Institutional Change
    Workplace and Corporate Law Research Group May 2009 Working Paper No. 15 THE EVOLUTION OF THE JOINT STOCK COMPANY TO 1800: A STUDY OF INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE PHILLIP LIPTON The Workplace and Corporate Law Research Group (WCLRG) is a research concentration within the Department of Business Law & Taxation, Faculty of Business & Economics, at Monash University. It has been in operation since March 2008, having previously operated as the Corporate Law and Accountability Research Group (CLARG) since November 2005. WCLRG invites the submission of papers for publication in its Working Paper Series. Submissions on workplace relations and employment law, labour market regulation, corporate governance, corporate social responsibility, and the intersections between labour law and corporate law are welcomed. For details, go to: http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/blt/wclrg/working-papers.html 1 THE EVOLUTION OF THE JOINT STOCK COMPANY TO 1800: A STUDY OF INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE Phillip Lipton [email protected] I Introduction This paper traces the evolution of the joint stock company from its origins to the end of the eighteenth century and presents an historical analysis of the evolution of the joint stock company from the perspective of institutional change.1 The related theoretical concepts of institutions, institutional evolution and path dependency, which describes the mechanism by which institutional change occurs, are discussed in Parts II and III. The paper then provides a narrative of the historical development of the joint stock company from its origins to 1800 in Part IV. Part V seeks to interpret the evolution of the joint stock company in the light of theories of institutional evolution and change.
    [Show full text]