No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 January 2016
We propose here to lay before English-speaking lawyers a general survey of the rights of shareholders in that form of société, which is described in continental law as société anonyme, compagnie anonyme or société par actions; and we shall endeavour to do it in a way which will be easily understood by “common” lawyers. We shall be considering in general continental rights, that is to say, those prevailing in the civil law countries not only of Western Europe but also of Latin America. We shall leave aside the Soviet countries, where the problems of shareholders' rights do not arise in the same way as under the so-called capitalist régimes; it may even be said that in fact there are no sociétés anonymes there with private capital and therefore these problems do not arise in practice. We shall also disregard the law of the United States of America, which lies within the common law framework and is more accessible to English lawyers.
1 The French term société anonyme, adopted in the Commercial Code of 1807, has been also adopted in Belgium, Portugal and certain Latin American countries such as Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Colombia and Mexico. The new Spanish legislation of 1951 also uses the term sociedad anonima, while the term compania anonima from the Spanish Commercial Code is also to be found in Peru, Venezuela, Cuba and Ecuador. The Portuguese word companhia is synonymous with sociedade anonima in Brazil. In Germanic countries the corresponding term is Aktiengesellschaft, that is to say, société par actions; similarly the new Italian legislation uses the term società per azioni.
We may note as a matter of interest that in Quebec the local code uses the-term société far actions because société anonyme signifies a kind of partnership with one or many dormant partners, that is to say, a secret association, called “association en participation” in France, but called “societe anonyme” in old French law.
Finally we may add that in countries where the term société anonyme is in use, société par actions means any association which issues shares, that is to say, the société anonyme. The société commandite par actions, a common form in continental law which has no equivalent in English law; it is a kind of limited partnership, which is a legal entity and the capital in which is represented by shares of the participants, whose liability is limited.
2 The English term society corresponds, in continental law, to those associations which are not organised for profit and which are called associations in Latin countries. In Germany this class of association are called Vereine not organised for profit; but there is a difference from the Latin countries that sociétés may in Germany have disinterested objects, and in this case they are the equivalent of the English “society.” Sometimes, however, a wrong terminology is used; for example, in France an association may call itself socie"ti: thus the “Societe de legislation compared” of Paris is not a société but an association.
3 Save in German law where they may be sociétés not organised for profit.
4 However, in most Latin countries it is a legal entity. In the Germanic law countries—Germany, Switzerland—and in the new Italian code, these sociétés do not have full legal personality.
5 See previous note.
6 See note (1). The “participation” is a kind of secret partnership with a dormant partner.
7 Stille Gesellschaft in German law: it is an association which is not disclosed to third persons, that is to say, it has a “ sleeping partner” unknown to the public.
8 In German law, Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung (GmbH). In France, société à responsabilitè limitée; in Belgium, société de personnes à responsabilité limitée; in Spain, sociedad de responsibilidad limitada; in Portugal and Brazil, sociedades por estas de responsabilidad limitada.
9 So in the United States the word “stock” is used to denote shares.
10 So in England “member” is a synonym for “shareholder.”
11 But in several Latin American countries we speak of directeurs, directores and not of administrateurs.
12 F. de Sola Canizares: Revista Juridica—La Ley (Buenos Aires) 16.5.50; and Report from Toulouse (Rev. Intern. de Droit Compard, Paris, 1953, no. 3).
13 The term “statutes” here includes both the memorandum and the articles of association, the English distinction between them not being recognised in continental law. Occasionally a distinction is made between the constitutive deed and the “statute” of the company, but the deed contains the statute so that they are in effect one and the same thing.
14 In some cases a single shareholder, who holds the required number of shares.
15 S. 210 of the English Companies Act, 1948, is an object of amazement for continental lawyers.
16 In countries where prior authority is required to constitute a company, the authority of the Executive power is necessary for any modification of the company's statute: this obtains in several countries of South America, for example, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and Colombia.
17 Germany, Law of 1937, Art. 58; Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2344; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Arts. 681, 682; Spain, Law of 1951, Art. 44; Brazil, Law of 1940, Art. 76; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 118; Ecuador, Commercial Code, Art. 320.
18 Argentina, Commercial Code, Art. 333.
19 So in France: see Escarra, , Manuel de Droit Commerciel (Paris, 1947) p. 423Google Scholar, and Ripert, , Traiti élémentaire de Droit Commerciel (Paris, 1950) 2nd ed., pp. 420, 421Google Scholar.
20 But here the company's statute contains a redemption-table or redemption is carried by drawing lots. Generally the shareholder receives another share called a dividend share (action de jouissance), entitling the holder to participate in the profits of the company.
21 As, for example, in Prance the confiscation of M. Renault's shares in the Renault company or the extinction of rights acquired by the Germans in French companies during the occupation.
22 Such a provision in a company's statute would be called a “leonine” clause after the Phaedrus fable of the lion who formed an association with the other animals but himself took all the shares. This rule against deprivation of profits is to be found in most civil codes: France, Art. 1855; Spain, Art. 1691. Argentina, Art. 1686; Brazil, Art. 1372. In Italy the shareholder's right to profits is derived from Art. 2247 of the Civil Code.
23 Germany, Civil Code, Art. 705. Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 620.
24 German Law of 1937, Art. 53, 54; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 660.
25 In France the institution of these shares dates from the Law of November 16, 1903. In most systems there is express provision for them : Germany, Law of 1937, Art. 11; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 654; Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2348; Spain, La w of 1951, Art. 37; Argentina, Commercial Code, Art. 334; Brazil, Law of 1940, Art. 9; Mexico, Law of 1934, Arts. 112, 113.
26 France, Commercial Code, Art. 34; Germany, Law of 1937, Art. 117; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 654; Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2376; Spain, Law 1951, Art. 85; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 195.
27 Germany, Law of 1937, Art. 54; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 676; Brazil, Law of 1940, Art. 10; Colombia, Law of 1931, Art. 36; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 123. In France this rule is recognised by the courts; but it has no place in other countries, for example, Italy.
28 Ripert, op. cit., p. 442.
29 Decree-Law of August 31, 1937, amending the Law of November 13, 1933. But the courts allow agreements by groups of shareholders to vote in a certain sense and nothing precludes the exercise of carte blanche powers.
30 Law of 1951, Art. 39.
31 Belgium, Law of 1935, Art. 74; Colombia, Decree of 1950, Art. 54.
32 Argentina, Commercial Code, Art. 325; Portugal, Commercial Code, Art. 185. In Uruguay they are recognised in administrative jurisprudence: Resolution of March 15, 1946. In Germany (Law of 1937, Art. 115) and Brazil (Law of 1940, Arts. 9, 10 and 81) it is possible to have shares, which are privileged in the distribution of profits but carry no vote.
33 Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2351; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 113.
34 France, Law of 1933; Germany, Law of 1937, Art. 12; Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2351; Spain, Law of 1951, Art. 38; Belgium, Law of 1935, Art. 74; Brazil, Law of 1940, Art. 80; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 113.
35 Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Arts. 627, 693.
36 Argentina, Uruguay, Peru, Chile.
37 Argentina, Commercial Code, Art. 350; Belgium, Law of 1935, Art. 76; Uruguay, Commercial Code, Art. 420. This limitation scarcely works in practice, since the holder of a large number of shares will make a fictional transfer of them before the meeting.
38 Germany, Law of 1937, Art. 114; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 692; France, Law of 1867, Art. 27.
39 France, Law of 1867, Art. 27; Spain, Law of 1951, Art. 39.
40 Vide supra.
41 In France the “bearer” share had been to all intents and purposes abolished by the Laws of 1941 and 1942, but it was reinstated in 1948. In Italy it was abolished by the Decree-Law of October 25, 1941, and in Ecuador by the Law of January 29, 1948. In Spain the new law of 1951 permits the existence of “bearer” shares but to little effect since the law of September 19, 1936, which continues in force, requires all transfers of shares to be made by deed witnessed by a stockbroker. In Chile the governmental authorities disallow company statutes making provision for “bearer” shares.
42 France, Law of 1867, Art. 3; Germany, Law of 1937, Art. 10; Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2355; Spain, Law of 1951, Art. 33; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 683; Belgkim, Law of 1935, Art. 96; Portugal, Commercial Code, Art. 166; Argentina, Commercial Code, Art. 326; Brazil, Law of 1940, Art. 23; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 117.
43 Peru, Commercial Code, Art. 171.
44 For France, Ripert, op. cit., p. 442; Belgium, Restan, Traité des Sociétés Anonymes, I.N. p. 673.
45 Germany, Law of 1937, Art. 61; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Arts. 627, 686; Italy, Civil Code, Art. 12325; Spain, Law of 1951, Art. 46; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 130; Brazil, Law of 1940, Art. 27.
46 Legal provisions on the point vary from country to country. The resolution may be concerned with a change in the company's objects or with merger or transformation.
47 Argentina, Commercial Code, Art. 354; Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2437; Brazil, Law of 1940, Art. 107; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 206; Uruguay, Law of July 19, 1909; Venezuela, Commercial Code, Art. 287. But the right of withdrawal does not exist in Prance, Belgium, Spain and several other countries.
48 France, Law of 1867, Art. 35; Germany, Law of 1937, Art. 125; Switzerland, Code of Objections, Art. 2432; Spain, Law of 1951, Art. 110; Colombia, Commercial Code, Arts. 586, 587; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 173.
49 France, Law of 1867, Art. 35; the shareholder may examine at any time documentary information presented to the general meeting. In Italy (Civil Code, Art. 2422) the register of shareholders and the minutes of the general meeting may be inspected. In Switzerland (Code of Obligations, Art. 697) a court order may be obtained for production by the company of extracts from its books or papers on specific points.
50 Fernandez, R., Codigo de Comercio Comentado (Buenos Aires, 1943) I, p. 396Google Scholar.
51 The English method of private scrutiny of a company's affairs has inspired the following legislation: France, Decree Law of 1937; Germany, Law of 1937, Arts. 118, 136; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 727; Italy, Commercial Code, Art. 2397; Argentina, Commercial Code, Arts. 325 and 340;, Belgium, Law of 1935, Art. 64; Portugal, Commercial Code, Art. 175; Spain, Law of 1951, Art. 108; Brazil, Law of 1940, Art. 124; Colombia, Law of 1931, Art. 58; Venezuela, Commercial Code, Art. 314.
52 For example, in South America, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Uruguay, Bolivia.
53 It should be noted that in some countries, for example, Ecuador (Decree of March 24, 1935) the supervision of the sociétés anonymes is in the charge of a judge, who upon the application of a shareholder must appoint an expert to investigate the company's affairs.
54 Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 706.
55 Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2378; Spain, Law of 1951, Art. 70; Portugal, Commercial Code, Art. 186; Venezuela, Commercial Code, Art. 295.
56 See infra.
57 Administrateur is the equivalent of the English “director.”
58 France, Civil Code, Art. 1382; Germany, Civil Code, Arts. 823, 826. Certain bodies of law expressly mention this right of shareholders, for example, Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2395; Spain, Law of 1951, Art. 81; Brazil, Law of 1940, Art. 123.
59 See infra.
60 Ripert, op. cit., p. 487; Fernandez, op. cit., p. 505.
61 Germany, Law of 1937, Art. 152; France, Decree Law of 1937; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 652; Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2409; Spain, Law of 1951, Art. 92; Brazil, Law of 1940, Art. 111; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 132.
62 See supra.
63 Germany, Law of 1937, Art. 106; Argentina, Commercial Code, Art. 348; Ecuador, Commercial Code, Art. 311; Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2367; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 184; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 699.
64 Ecuador, Commercial Code, Art. 311; Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2374; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 199; Venezuela, Commercial Code, Art. 293.
65 Ecuador, Decree No. 153 of 1936; Italy, Civil Code, Arts. 2377, 2378; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 201; Norway, Law of 1910, Art. 67; Sweden, Law No. 14 of 1944; Venezuela, Commercial Code. Art. 295.
66 Colombia, Law No. 58 of 1931, Art. 29; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 144; Switzerland, Code of Obligations, Art. 708.
67 Brazil, Law of 1940, Art. 125; Mexico, Law of 1934, Art. 171; Sweden, Law No. 14 of 1944.
68 Germany, Art. 118; Ecuador, Decree of March 24, 1936; Italy, Civil Code, Art. 2409; Venezuela, Commercial Code, Art. 296.
69 For example, Art. 358 of the Argentine Commercial Code gives a minority of shareholders resident abroad the right to form a group and nominate representatives to the general meeting of the company.
70 See Gassigo, A. van der Heyde, La proteccion estatutaria del accionista (Buenos Aires, 1938)Google Scholar.
71 The solutions vary. Some legal systems, for example, Spain (Law of 1951, Art. 58), require a quorum to be present; others, for example, Germany (Law of 1937, Arts. 146 and following) require a qualified majority; others, again, such as France (Law of 1867, Art. 31), require both.
72 See Lyon, Caen & Renault, , Traité de droit commercial, 2nd ed. (1892) p. 647et seq.Google Scholar; Appleton, , Du droit des assemblées extraordinaires de modifier les statuts (Paris, 1902)Google Scholar; Boncart, , De l'organisation et des pouvoirs des assemblées générales (Paris, 1905)Google Scholar; David, R., La protection des minoritis dans les sociétés par actions (Paris, 1929)Google Scholar.
73 See A. Polo, El respeto a las bases esenciales de la sociedad, Arriba 16.8.1942; Garrigues, J., Tratado de derecho mercantil (Madrid, 1947)Google Scholar. On the powers of the shareholders' meeting in Spanish law, see Gella, A. Vicente, Las resoluciones de la asambles general de una sociedad anonima (Zaragoza, 1932)Google Scholar; Jordana, J. Dalmases, El regimen de mayorias en la sociedad anonima (Estudios de derecho historico y moderno, Madrid, 1949)Google Scholar; Canizares, F. de Sola, Le droit espagnol des sociétés anonymes (Paris, 1947) pp. 153et seq.Google Scholar
74 Mezger, E., Le nouvcau régime den sodétés anonymes en Allemagne (Paris, 1939) p. 305Google Scholar.
75 Art. 35 of the Civil Code is confined to indicating that certain rights only may not be affected. The new law of 1937 on companies offers no definition of these rights; the official commentary upon it regards as special rights all the rights of sharing in the administration possessed by members of the company: Schlegeberger-Quassowski, Commentary, p. 464; but this is not a definition, much less an enumeration.
76 Art. 646 of the Code of Obligations.
77 Valverde, T. de Miranda, Sociedades por acoes (Rio de Janeiro, 1941) I, p. 376Google Scholar.
78 Art. 78 of the Decree-Law of September 26, 1940.
79 Alexander, , Die Sonderrechte der Aktionáre (Berlin, 1892)Google Scholar; Lehmann, , Das Recht der Akticngesellschaften (Berlin, 1894 and 1904)Google Scholar; Fischer, , Die Aktiengesellschaft (Leipzig, 1916)Google Scholar; Horrwitz, , Das Recht der Generalversammlungen der Aktiengesellschaften (1913)Google Scholar; Bondi, , Die Rechte der Aktionäre (Berlin, 1930)Google Scholar; Ritter, , Sonderrechte der Aktionäre (Hausrechts- und Gerichts-Zeitung, 1934) pp. 417et seq.Google Scholar
80 Bachmann, , Die Sonderrechte des Aktionärs (Zurich, 1902)Google Scholar; Wieland, , Handelsrecht (Munich and Leipzig, 1931)Google Scholar; Siegwart, , Aktiengesellschaft, Kommentatur (Zurich, 1945) 2nd ed.Google Scholar
81 Thaller, , Note to Dalloz (1893) pp. 105et seq.Google Scholar; Appleton, op. cit., supra, note 72; Boncart, op. cit., ibid.; Chizaut, , Les pouvoirs de l'assemblée extraordinaire dans les sociétés par actions et les droits propres de l'actionnaire (Toulouse, 1906)Google Scholar. Lauquest, , Des droits de l'actionnaire dans Us sociétés anonymes (Paris, 1908)Google Scholar; Leohner, H., Les droits propres des actionnaires (Nancy, 1933)Google Scholar; de la Mechenie, Garreau, Les droits propres des actionnaires (Poitiers, 1937)Google Scholar.
82 Vighi, , I diritti individuali degli azionista (Parma, 1902)Google Scholar; Navarrini, , Delia società e della associazone commerciale (Milan, 1924)Google Scholar; Ferra, , La Tutela de la minoranza nelle societa per azioni (Dir. Prat. Comm. 1932) I, pp. 23et seq.Google Scholar; Ascarchi, , Studi in tema de società (Milan, 1952) pp. 82et seq.Google Scholar
83 J. Garrigues, op cit. in note 73, pp. 971 et seq.; and see works referred to in note 73.
84 de Nagalhaes, Bonbosa, Revista da Ordem dos advogados (Lisbon, 1948) No. 1–2Google Scholar.
85 Goldschmidt, , Problemas juridicos de la sociedad anonima, Chap. V (Buenos Aires, 1946)Google Scholar.
86 Ferreira, W. and Alves|de Aranjo, C., O direito insurrecdonal do accionista (Sao Paulo, 1939)Google Scholar.
87 Serkovic, Baldo, La Sociedad anonima y la asamblea general de accionistas, Revista de Derecho y Ciencias Politicas (Lima, 1945) No. 111, 1947Google Scholar.
88 Article 1134.
89 Belgium, Civil Code, Art. 1134; Spain, Commercial Code, Art. 57.
90 R. David, op. cit., p. 41; Garrigues, op. cit., p. 1006.
91 By the application of Articles 138 an d 826 of the Civil Code: see cases cited by David, op. cit., p. 150, and by Mezger, op. cit., pp. 286, 309.
92 Josserand, , De l'abus de droit (Paris, 1905)Google Scholar; De l'esprit des lois et leur relativité (Paris, 1939) 2nd ed.Google Scholar; Saleilles, , Théorie générale de l'obligation Bull. Soc. Lég. (1905)Google Scholar. The literature on the subject of the abuse of rights is substantial in all countries: see Spota, A. G., Relatividad y abuso de los derechos in Volume 1Google Scholar, Part 2 of his Tratado de derecho civil (Buenos Aires, 1947)Google Scholar for the most recent and complete work.
93 Markovitch, V. M., La théorie de l'abus des droits en droit comparé (Paris, 1936)Google Scholar.
94 Decugis, , “L'abus du droit dans les sociétés par actions,” Journal des Sociétés, 1925, p. 481Google Scholar; David, op. cit.; Bosvieux, A., De l'organisation et des pouvoirs de l'assemblée extraordinaire des actionnaires (Paris, 1933)Google Scholar; Harpin, C. and Bosvieux, H., Traité Général des Sociétés, 7th ed. (1935) II, pp. 484et seq.Google Scholar; Royer, Copper, “De la notion juridique de Vabus du droit et de son application possible en matiere des sociétés,” Rev, Spec. de Sociétés, 1937, p. 1Google Scholar; Coppens, , L'abus de la majorité dans les sociétés anonymes (Louvain, 1947)Google Scholar. As regards the possibilities of the application of the doctrine in Spain: Canizares, F. de Sola: Le droit espaghol, pp. 161et seq.Google Scholar, and for the new Spanish law see Canizares, F. de Sola, Tratado de sociedades anonimos (Barcelona, 1953)Google Scholar.
95 German Civil Code, Art. 226; Swiss Civil Code, Art. 2.
96 See in particular Art. 197 of the German law of 1937 and Art. 706 of the Swiss Code of Obligations.
97 Abus de pouvoirs.
98 Haurion, M., Principes de droit public (1910–1911)Google Scholar; L'Institution et le droit statutaire, Rec. Legisl, de Toulouse, 1906Google Scholar; La Théorie de l'institution et de la fondation, 4th volume of the Nouvelle JournéeGoogle Scholar.
99 Renard, G., La théorie de l'institution (Essai d'ontologie juridique, Paris, 1930)Google Scholar.
page 576 note 1 See note 1 on page 577.
page 577 note 1 Delos, , “La théorie de l'institution,” Archives de Phil. du droit 1–2, 1931Google Scholar; Morin, “Vers la révision de la technique juridique: Le concepte de l'institution”: ibid.; Desqueyrat, , L'institution de droit suhjectif et la technique juridique (Paris, 1934)Google Scholar; Bonnecasse, , “Une nouvelle mystique—la notion d'institution,” Rev. Gen. du droit, 1931, Part 5Google Scholar; 1932, Parts 1 and 2.
page 577 note 2 Jennings, W. Ivor, “The Institutional Theory,” Modern Theories of Law (London, 1933)Google Scholar; Corts, J., “G. Renard y su doctrina de la institution,” Extrait de la Revista de derecho publica (Madrid, 1934)Google Scholar; Ferraz, A. Decio, “Teoria da institao,” Rev. Crit. Jurid. (Rio de Janeiro, 1934)Google Scholar; Aftalion, E. and Olano, F. Garcia, “La Teoria de la institution,” Boletin Mens. del Seminario de Cienc. Jur. (Buenos Aires, 1935), Vol. IVGoogle Scholar; Laplaza, “La Teoria de la institucion y la teoria de la causa en los contratoe," ibid.; Dowdall, H. C., “L'anatomie d'un corps social—La theorie des institutions,” Recueil en l'honneur de Lambert (Paris, 1938)Google Scholar; Palz, J. L., El derecho de la asociaciones (Buenos Aires, 1940)Google Scholar; Lissarraques, , “El concepto de institucion en el derecho publico de Haurion,” Rev. de la Facultad de Derecho de Madrid, 1941, No. 6 and 7Google Scholar; Casaras, , “L'institucionalidad en el derecho,” Revista de la Univ. Nacional de Buenos Aires, 1944, p. 199Google Scholar; Juinenez, J. Ruiz, La conception institucional del derecho (Madrid, 1944)Google Scholar; Spota, A. G., Tratado de Derecho Civil, Vol. 1, Pt. 1 (Buneos Aires, 1947)Google Scholar.
page 577 note 3 Gaillard, E., La Société anonyme de demain (Paris, 1932)Google Scholar; Laurent, Thibault, “De la nature juridique de la souscription à une société anonyme,” Rev. Gen. de droit commercial (Paris, 1942) No. 4Google Scholar; Ripert, G., Aspects juridiques du capitalisme moderne (Paris, 1946)Google Scholar; Traiti Elementaire de droit commercial (Paris, 1948)Google Scholar; Escarra, J., Manuel de Droit Commercial (Paris, 1947)Google Scholar; Portemer, J., “Du contrat à l'institution,” Germaine Jurid., 1947, I, 586Google Scholar; Carrizares, F. de Sola, “La crisis del concepto juridico clasico aplicable a las empresas por acciones,” La Ley, Vol. 46, p. 964 (Buenos Aires, 1947)Google Scholar; “La teoria de la institution en las sociedades por acciones,” Revista trimestral de derecho comercial (Bogota, 1947) No. 5Google Scholar; “La crisis del concepto clasico de la sociedad anonima,” Revista de derecho y jurisprudencia (Santiago, 1944), Vol. 44, No. 9, 10)Google Scholar; “Le caractère institutionnel de la société de capitaux,” Rapport sur le III Congrès International de droit comparé, London, 1950. See also memoranda to conference of P. Gieseke (in German); B. de Montouollin (in French); G. Hornsey (in English). See further Canizares, F. de Sola, “Las formas juridicas de las empresas,” Revista de derecho mercantil (Madrid, 1952) No. 39Google Scholar.
page 577 note 4 Canizares, F. de Sola, “Le critère de la dimension dans les sociétés cammerciales en droit comparé,” Rev. Trimest. de droit commercial (Paris, 1950) No. 3Google Scholar.