| Tittel: | Vinstsyftet och andra ägarskyddsfrågor – några reflektioner med anledning av en tvist | | Ansvar: | Niklas Arvidsson og Per Samuelsson | | Forfatter: | Arvidsson, Niklas  / Samuelsson, Per | | Materialtype: | Artikkel - elektronisk | | Signatur: | Nordisk tidsskrift for Selskabsret | | Utgitt: | København : DJØF Forlag, 2024 | | Omfang: | S. 296-308 | | Serie: | Nordisk tidsskrift for Selskabsret ; 4/2024 | | Emneord: | Aksjeselskapsrett | | Stikkord: | Aktiebolagslagen (Sverige) 2005 29 kap. / Aktiebolagslagen (Sverige) 2005 3 kap. 3 § / Aktiebolagslagen (Sverige) 2005 4 kap. 1 § | | Geografiske emneord: | Sverige | | Innhold: | It is easy to misunderstand the profit purpose under Chapter 3, Section 3 of the Swedish Companies Act. This purpose gives rise to a fundamental duty guided by a relatively well-defined objective: the maximization of the value of the company’s equity. For a decision to be unlawful on this ground, it is required that the decision has been taken even though the circumstances show that the decision-makers actually considered that another decision (or non-decision) would have had a greater chance of maximizing this value. This is seldom the case. However, the members of the board and the chief executive officer are also obliged to strive to identify decision alternatives that maximize the value of the company’s equity. Failure to exercise due diligence in this regard can lead to liability under Chapter 29, Section 1 of the Swedish Companies Act, even though the profit purpose has not been violated. The general clauses are also easy to misunderstand, particularly in relation to the principle of equality (“likhetsprincipen”). Both the profit purpose and the general clauses can raise difficult questions that require comparisons between a certain price and share values. When the shares are not listed, questions arise concerning how the valuation should be carried out and how to distinguish between “reliable” and “unreliable” valuations. The Swedish Supreme Court has recently addressed these issues, albeit in a specific context of tort law. In our view, it is clear from these precedents that current law accepts that companies often lack unequivocally determined values and that the question of which valuation method to apply falls under the procedural principle of party disposition.
Denna artikel behandlar ett antal aktiebolagsrättsliga frågor uppkomna i en tvist, därav artikelns tämligen formella uppläggning och det jämförelsevis magra antalet referenser. Omständigheterna i tvisten var följande. Aktiebolaget »Bolaget« ska enligt bolagsordningen äga och förvalta samtliga aktier i det privata »Dotterbolaget«, som bedriver läkemedelsrörelse. I Bolaget finns två slags aktier: dels stamaktier, dels en preferensaktie. Ägarförhållandena är sådana att »Holdingbolaget« har 85 procent av aktierna, däribland preferensaktien, medan resterande 15 procent ägs av privatpersonen Anna. | | Del av verk: | Nordisk tidsskrift for selskabsret 4/2024 |
|
|