法经济学的限度--美国公司反收购立法的合宪性论争及其启示  

Limit of Law and Economics:Application and Obsoleteness of the Theory of Market for Corporate Control in U.S.Congress

作　　者：肖崇俊[1] XIAO Chongjun

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学法律文明史研究院

出　　处：《中国政法大学学报》2022年第2期113-125,共13页Journal Of CUPL

基　　金：2020年度国家法治与法学理论研究项目“英国收购与兼并委员会研究”(项目号20SFB4054);华东政法大学2017年度科学研究项目“美国公司并购浪潮与证券监管”(项目号17HZK017)的阶段性研究成果。

摘　　要：法经济学在我国已经具有深远的影响,但是该理论对效率的追求与法的公平正义价值存在天然的冲突。这一冲突在美国公司要约收购立法史中表现得尤为明显。以亨利·G.曼尼为代表的法经济学者认为并购是公司控制权市场运作的结果,它可以导向效率,且对小股东而言是更有利的保护机制。这一理念得到美国联邦国会的认可,因此《威廉姆斯法案》改变了打击要约收购的立场转而选择在收购方与目标公司之间保持中立。州的反收购立场与此发生冲突,于是反收购立法的合宪性问题被提交给美国联邦最高法院。在决定反收购立法命运的两个案件中,美国联邦最高法院给出了两个截然相反的结论。怀特法官在迈特案中依据公司控制权市场理论判定以拖延为主要手段的第一代公司反收购立法违宪;而鲍威尔法官在CTS案中判定剥夺控制股份表决权的第二代公司反收购立法合宪。反收购立法的合宪性问题折射出的是公司控制权市场理论在美国联邦最高法院被应用又被废弃的历史。同时,它深刻地反映出一个事实:法经济学是有限度的,这个限度就是法律的公平价值。Law and Economics has had a profound influence in China,but there is a natural conflict between the pursuit of efficiency in this theory and the fairness and justice value of law.This conflict is particularly evident in the legislative history of U.S.corporate tender offers.Law and economics scholars represented by Henry G.Manny believe that mergers and acquisitions are the result of the operation of the market for corporate control,which can lead to efficiency as a more favorable protection mechanism for small shareholders.This concept was recognized by the US Federal Congress.Therefore,“the Williams Act”changed the position of combating tender offer and chose to maintain neutrality between the acquirer and the target company.The states’anti-takeover laws conflicted with this position,and the issue arose as whether the anti-takeover legislations constitutional or not?In the two cases that determined the fate of anti-takeover legislations,the U.S.Supreme Court came to two diametrically opposed conclusions.In the EDGAR v.Mite Corp.et al.,Judge White ruled that the Illinois anti-takeover bill was unconstitutional based on the theory of market for corporate control;while in CTS Corp.v.Dynamics Corporation of America,Judge Powell ruled that the Indiana Business Corporation Law was constitutional.The issue of the constitutionality of anti-takeover legislation reflects the history of the theory of market for corporate control being applied and abandoned in the U.S.Supreme Court.At the same time,it deeply reflects the fact that Law and Economics has a limit,and this limit is the fair value of law.

关 键 词：法经济学 公司控制权市场 威廉姆斯法案 要约收购 反收购 

分 类 号：D912.29[政治法律—民商法学]