Working paper / Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-Universität, Institut for Law and Finance
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (96)
Has Fulltext
- yes (96)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (96)
Keywords
- Berichtspflicht des Vorstands (1)
- European Takeover Directive (1)
- European law (1)
- Feststellungsklage (1)
- Rechtsschutz der Aktionäre (1)
- UCITS (1)
- asset management (1)
- break-through rule (1)
- company law (1)
- corporate insolvency (1)
- corporate voting (1)
- golden shares (1)
- multiple-voting shares (1)
- non-voting shares (1)
- one share-one vote (1)
- product diversity (1)
- regulatory competition (1)
Institute
- Rechtswissenschaft (96) (remove)
6
10
In an ideal world all investment products, including hedge funds, would be marketable to all investors. In this ideal world, all investors would fully understand the nature of the products and would be able to make an informed choice whether to invest. Of course the ideal world does not exist – the retail investment market is characterised by asymmetries of information. Product providers know most about the products on offer (or at least they should do). Investment advisers often know rather less than the provider but much more than their retail customers. Providers and intermediary advisers are understandably motivated by the desire to sell their products. There is therefore a risk that investment products will be mis-sold by investment advisers or mis-bought by ill-informed investors. This asymmetry of information is dealt with in most countries through regulation. However, the regulatory response in different countries is not necessarily the same. There are various ways in which protections can be applied and it is important to understand that the cultural background and regulatory histories of countries flavours the way regulation has developed. This means (as will be explained in greater detail later) that some countries are better able than others to admit hedge funds to the retail sector. Following this Introduction, Section II looks at some key background issues. Section III then looks at some important questions raised by the retail hedge fund issue. Many of these are questions of balance. Balance lies at the heart of regulation of course – regulation must always balance the needs of investors and with market efficiency. Understanding the “retail hedge fund” question requires particular attention to balance. Section IV then looks at the UK regime and how the FSA has answered the balance question. Section V offers some international perspectives. Section VI concludes. It will be seen that there is no obviously right answer to the question whether hedge fund products should be marketed to retail investors. Each regulator in each jurisdiction needs to make up its own mind on how to deal with the various issues and balances. It is evident, however, that internationally there is a move towards a greater variety of retail funds. There is nothing wrong with that, provided the regulators and the retail customers they protect, understand sufficiently what sort of protection is, or is not, being offered in the regulatory regime.
44
This Paper will look at the changing nature of asset management, and will examine the nature of the European framework for collective investment undertakings, enshrined in the UCITS Directive2 in that light. This question whether the UCITS Directive in its current form remains an appropriate European response to the changing investment management landscape is an issue with which the European Commission is actively engaging through its Green Paper on the Enhancement of the EU Framework for Investment Funds, published in July 2005.3 But before considering these important questions, it is necessary to begin with an idea of what a collective investment, more specifically a UCITS actually is and how it fits conceptually in the broader world of pooled investments.....
55
Zusammenfassung in Thesen 1. Der Wegzug von deutschen Gesellschaften in das EU-Ausland in Gestalt der Verlegung des Verwaltungssitzes führt nach deutschem Gesellschaftsrecht zur Auflösung der Gesellschaft, wenn die Sitzverlegung mit einem Statutenwechsel einhergeht. In der Mehrzahl der Fälle bleibt indessen deutsches Gesellschaftsrecht anwendbar. Die Auflösung der Gesellschaft ist hier allerdings gerichtlich zu erzwingen, sollte der inländische Satzungssitz nicht mehr durch §§ 5 Abs. 2 AktG, 4 a Abs. 2 GmbHG gerechtfertigt sein. Die Abkehr des geplanten „MoMiG“ von diesem Standpunkt ist rechtspolitisch zu begrüßen, aber nur im Verein mit einem generellen Übergang auch zur Gründungsanknüpfung im deutschen Kollisionsrecht sinnvoll, so wie dies der Deutsche Rat für Internationales Privatrecht vorschlägt. 2. Der Wegzug in Gestalt einer schlichten Verlagerung des Satzungssitzes einer nach deutschem Recht gegründeten Gesellschaft in das EU-Ausland ist nach deutschem Gesellschaftsrecht unzulässig. Rechtspolitisch ist die Einführung eines geregelten Verfahrens einer grenzüberschreitenden Satzungssitzverlegung zu befürworten, so wie dies der Deutsche Rat für Internationales Privatrecht vorschlägt. 3. Die „wilde“ Herausverschmelzung einer nach deutschem Recht gegründeten Gesellschaft – d.h. spiegelbildlich zur „SEVIC“ und außerhalb der geplanten §§ 122 a ff. UmwG – auf eine EU-ausländische Gesellschaft ist nach deutschem Gesellschaftsrecht unzulässig.
18
Der vorliegende Aufsatz befasst sich mit Fragen, die auftreten, wenn die an einer deutschen Börse notierten Aktien einer deutschen Gesellschaft auch an der New York Stock Exchange (im Folgenden “NYSE”) notiert werden und zwar ohne Zwischenschaltung von Hinterlegungsscheinen (American Depositary Receipts, im Folgenden “ADR”). Der Aufsatz behandelt dagegen nicht die Rechtsfragen, die sowohl bei einer Börsennotierung von Aktien als auch bei einer Börsennotierung von ADR einer deutschen Gesellschaft gelöst werden müssen, z.B. Rechtsfragen, die sich auf das US-amerikanische Kapitalmarktrecht, insbesondere das Bilanzrecht, die US-amerikanischen Anforderungen an die Corporate Governance, das Insiderverbot und Verhaltensregeln im Umgang mit der Presse beziehen.
102
It has become popular for journalists who are trying to sell newspapers, and politicians who are trying to solicit votes, to refer to this financial crisis as the worst since the Great Depression or WWII. I don’t know whether it is the worst or not so will leave that question to the historians and economists of the future once the storm has past. But it is indeed a “storm” as described by Vince Cable, Member of Parliament in his UK bestselling book entitled “The Storm – The World Economic Crisis and What it Means”. He describes this “storm” as a very destructive one displacing jobs, businesses, banks and whole economies from Iceland to the United Kingdom to the United States. I propose to offer a short chronology and summary of the causes of the current economic crisis. Then I will review several of the regulatory responses to the crisis focusing on the Turner Report, the de Larosière Group and certain US Treasury statements. I will offer my critiques of these proposals and then make some predictions of what the financial services industry may look like in the future.
81