Shareholder Remedies in China and England : Are they Comparable

Abstract

A great amount of research has been published on the comparison of shareholder remedies in the United Kingdom and China. It has been invariably argued that shareholder remedies in China are inadequate in protecting the interests of shareholders and that in searching for future law reform, it is essential to learn lessons from other jurisdictions, most notably England, where the law on shareholder remedies has developed over a longer period of time. While the current law on shareholder remedies in England and China has been analysed in detail in the existing literature, a more fundamental issue has been largely neglected: is the law on shareholder remedies in England and China comparable despite their distinctive historical, social-economic, political and legal background? This article seeks to address this question by exploring the differences in the historical backgrounds and the similarities of the nature of companies and shareholder complaints in England and China. The second section provides an overview of shareholder remedies in England and China. The third section analyses the differences in the historical backgrounds in England and China in terms of constitutional, political and economic backgrounds, social and cultural backgrounds, as well as legal and judicial backgrounds. The fourth section evaluates the similarities of the nature of companies, corporate governance, majority rule and the nature of shareholder complaints in both jurisdictions. It is concluded that that English law can be used for comparison and reference for further law reforms with regard to shareholders’ remedies in China