You are on page 1of 12

Corporation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Corporation (disambiguation).
"Corporate" redirects here. For the Bollywood film, see Corporate (film).
This article is part of a series on
corporate law
Society.svg
By jurisdiction[show]
General corporate forms[show]
Corporate forms
by jurisdiction[show]
Doctrines[show]
Related areas[show]
Company portal Law portal
v t e
McDonald's Corporation is one of the most recognizable corporations in the world
.
A corporation is a company or group of people authorized to act as a single enti
ty (legally a person) and recognized as such in law. Early incorporated entities
were established by charter (i.e. by an ad hoc act granted by a monarch or pass
ed by a parliament or legislature). Most jurisdictions now allow the creation of
new corporations through registration.
Corporations come in many different types but are usually divided by the law of
the jurisdiction where they are chartered into two kinds: by whether or not they
can issue stock, or by whether or not they are for profit.
Where local law distinguishes corporations by ability to issue stock, corporatio
ns allowed to do so are referred to as "stock corporations", ownership of the co
rporation is through stock, and owners of stock are referred to as "stockholders
." Corporations not allowed to issue stock are referred to as "non-stock" corpor
ations, those who are considered the owners of the corporation are those who hav
e obtained membership in the corporation, and are referred to as a "member" of t
he corporation.
Corporations chartered in regions where they are distinguished by whether they a
re allowed to be for profit or not are referred to as "for profit" and "not-forprofit" corporations, respectively.
There is some overlap between stock/non-stock and for profit/not-for-profit in t
hat not-for-profit corporations are always non-stock as well. A for profit corpo
ration is almost always a stock corporation, but some for profit corporations ma
y choose to be non-stock. To simplify the explanation, whenever "stockholder" is
used in the rest of this article to refer to a stock corporation, it is presume
d to mean the same as "member" for a non-profit corporation or for profit, non-s
tock corporation.
Registered corporations have legal personality and are owned by shareholders[1][
2] whose liability is limited to their investment. Shareholders do not typically
actively manage a corporation; shareholders instead elect or appoint a board of
directors to control the corporation in a fiduciary capacity.
In American English the word corporation is most often used to describe large bu
siness corporations.[3] In British English and in the Commonwealth countries, th
e term company is more widely used to describe the same sort of entity while the
word corporation encompasses all incorporated entities. In American English, th
e word company can include entities such as partnerships that would not be refer
red to as companies in British English as they are not a separate legal entity.

and such priva te associations as sponsors of a religious cult. However corporations are not consider ed living entities in the way that humans are.Despite not being human beings. order o f court.[6] Corporations can be "dissolved" either by statutory operation. such as fraud and manslaughter. or voluntary action on the part of shareholders. Sweden. existing in perpetuity. and guilds of craftsmen or traders." By the time of Justinian (reigned 527–565).400 florins . for the amount of 2.[4][5] and they can themselves be responsible for human rights viola tions.1 Deregulation 1. The point was that the incorporation would sur vive longer than the lives of any particular member. ar e legal persons. In medieval times traders would do business through common law constructs. Mercantilism[edit] See also: Mercantilism A bond issued by the Dutch East India Company. dating from 1623. Whenever people acted together with a view to profit.2.[9] Entities which carried on business and were the subjects of legal rights were fo und in ancient Rome.2. political groups. These included the state itself (the populus Romanus). and the Maurya Empire in ancient India.2 Limited liability 1. in general. Roman Law recognized a ran ge of corporate entities under the names universitas. or a "body of people. to receive gifts and legacies. corporations.[7] but it most often results in a res tructuring of corporate holdings. a nd.2 Naming 3 See also 4 Notes 5 Further reading 6 External links History[edit] See also: List of oldest companies 1/8 share of the Stora Kopparberg mine. burial clubs. to sue and be sued.2 Modern company law 1.[10] In medieval Eur ope. dated June 16.2. The word "corporation" derives from corpus. Private associati ons were granted designated privileges and liberties by the emperor. Early guilds and livery companies were also ofte n involved in the regulation of competition between traders. The alleged oldest commercial corporation in the world. Corporations can even be convicted of criminal offenses. and have many of the same rights and responsibilities as natura l persons do. Insolvency may result in a form of corporate failure. to perform legal acts through representatives. Corporations can exercise human rights against real individuals an d the state. 1288.3 Further developments 2 Ownership and control 2. churches became incorporated. corpus or collegium. the Stora Kopparberg mining community in Falun.1 Mercantilism 1. the Latin word for body. obtained a charter from King Magnus Eriksson in 134 7.[8] Contents [hide] 1 History 1. such as the Pope an d the City of London Corporation.1 Formation 2. Such bodies commonly had the right to own p roperty and make contracts. when creditors force the liquidation and dissolu tion of the corporation under court order. as did local governments. such as partnerships. municipalities. as far as the law is concerned. the law d eemed that a partnership arose.

and vested. just as most corporations were essentially dependent on the Royal Navy's ability to control trade routes. the author of the first treatise on corpo rate law in English. by policy of the law. As bankruptcies and recriminations ricocheted through governm ent and high society. such as the Dutch East India Company (VOC) or the Hudson's Bay Company. Queen Eli zabeth I granted the company a 15-year monopoly on trade to and from the East In dies and Africa. The rapid inflation of the stock value in the 1710s led to the Bubble Act 1720. bringing in revenue from its exploits abroad. as an individual. Subsequent stock offering s demonstrated just how lucrative the Company had become. which (possibly with the motive of protecting t he South Sea Company from competition) prohibited the establishment of any compa nies without a Royal Charter. which restricted the establishmen t of companies without a Royal Charter. In fact t he Spanish remained hostile and let only one ship a year enter. The share price rose so rapidly that people began buying shares merely in order to sell them at a higher price. . signed in 1713 as a settlement following the War of Spanish Succession. the mood against corporations. and were able to trade their shares on th e original Amsterdam Stock Exchange.[14] Chart of the South Sea Company's stock prices. the Dutch East India Company defeated Por tuguese forces and established itself in the Moluccan Islands in order to profit from the European demand for spices. having perpetual succession under an artificial form. but by the end of 1720. In the late 18th century.[11] In England. with the capacity of acting. Shareholders are also explicitly granted li mited liability in the company's royal charter. investors in Britain. the government created corporations under a Royal Charter or an Act of Parliament with the grant of a monopoly over a specified territory. and errant directors. These chartered companies became the progenitors of the modern corporation. The best known example. Queen Elizabeth I granted it the exclusive right to trade with all countries to the ea st of the Cape of Good Hope. This accelerated the inflation of the share price furt her. A similar chartered company.[13] By 1611. but met with less success. Unaware of the p roblems. under a special denominat ion. Labeled by both contemporaries and historians as "the grandest society of mercha nts in the universe". its second in 1617–1622 raised £1. was b itter. shareholders in the East India Company were earnin g a return on their investment of almost 150 per cent. which in turn led to higher share prices. was established in 1711 to t rade in the Spanish South American colonies. established in 1600. the English East India Company would come to symbolize the dazzlingly rich potential of the corporation.[12] On 31 December 1600. defined a corporation as: a collection of many individuals united into one body. the South Sea Company was s o wealthy (still having done no real business) that it assumed the public debt o f the British government. which g ave Great Britain an assiento to trade in the region for thirty years. By 1717. Acting under a chart er sanctioned by the Dutch government. the South Sea Company. Stewart Kyd.Many European nations chartered corporations to lead colonial ventures. and the share price sank fro m £1000 to under £100. the bubble had "burst". in several respects. enticed by extravagant promises of profit from co mpany promoters bought thousands of shares. as well as new methods of busines s that could be both brutal and exploitative. was the East India Company of London.6 million. Some corporations at this time would act on the gov ernment's behalf. Subsequently the Company became increasingly integrated with English and later British military and colonial policy. This was the first speculative bubble the country had se en. as did the Bubble Act 1720. Investors in the VOC were issued paper cer tificates as proof of share ownership. The Sout h Sea Company's monopoly rights were supposedly backed by the Treaty of Utrecht.000. Its first stock offeri ng in 1613–1616 raised £418.

or at any subsequent period of its existence. Then in 1843.[19] The advantage of establishing a company as a separate leg al person was mainly administrative. — A Treatise on the Law of Corporations. rega rded as the first modern piece of company law. The first. it was possible for ordinary people through a simple registration procedu re to incorporate. either at the tim e of its creation. and of exercising a variety of political rights.[17] The process of incorporation was possible only through a royal charter or a priv ate act and was limited. then. Mr Robert Lowe. though business ven tures (such as those chronicled by Charles Dickens in Martin Chuzzlewit) under p rimitive companies legislation were often scams. stage cost £5 and did not confer corporate status. as a unified entity under which the rights and duties of all investors and managers could be channeled. owing to Parliament's jealous protection of the privile ges and advantages thereby granted. In 1776.[15] Deregulation[edit] "Jack and the Giant Joint-Stock". The British Bubble Act 1720's prohibition on establishing companies remained in force until its repeal in 1825. Limited liability[edit] However. Though Parliament would sometimes grant a pr ivate act to allow an individual to represent the whole in legal proceedings. allowed only to established co mpanies. William Gladstone became the chairman of a Parliamentary Committee on Joint Stock Companies. pressing for legal change to facilitate business activity.[18] The Act created the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies. empowered to register companies by a two-stage proces s.[16] The re peal was the beginning of a gradual lifting on restrictions. provisional. was the Limited Liability Act 1855. there was still no limited liability and company members could still be held responsible for unlimited losses by the company. pr overbial operations like the "Anglo-Bengalee Disinterested Loan and Life Assuran ce Company" were undercapitalised ventures promising no hope of success except f or richly paid promoters. This allowed investor s to limit their liability in the event of business failure to the amount they i . passed at the behest of the then Vice President of the Board of Trade.[20] The next. Stewart Kyd (1793–1794) Modern company law[edit] Due to the late 18th century abandonment of mercantilist economic theory and the rise of classical liberalism and laissez-faire economic theory due to a revolut ion in economics led by Adam Smith and other economists. a cartoon in Town Talk (1858) satirizing the ' monster' joint-stock economy that came into being after the Joint Stock Companie s Act 1844. or the powers conferred upon it. By this point the Industrial Revolution had gath ered pace. corporations transition ed from being government or guild affiliated entities to being public and privat e economic entities free of government direction. and o f suing and being sued. according to t he design of its institution. of enjoying privileges and immunities in common. As a result. because people in charge of others' mo ney would not exercise as much care as they would with their own. Any cons equent litigation had to be carried out in the joint names of all the members an d was almost impossibly cumbersome. many businesses came to be oper ated as unincorporated associations with possibly thousands of members. of contracting obligations.particularly of taking and granting property. For the first time in hi story. which led to the Joint Stock Companies Act 1844. crucial dev elopment. whic h arose after completing the second stage for another £5. Adam Smith wrote in the Wealth of Nations that mass corporate activity could not match private entrepreneurship. th is was a narrow and necessarily costly expedient. more or less extensive. Without cohesive regulation.

nvested in the company . published in International Journal of Trends in Economics Managem ent and Technology (IJTEMT).[24] Further developments[edit] Lindley LJ was the leading expert on partnerships and company law in the Salomon v. Much strong academic. with the go . case. t hereby make a reasonable assessment on the value of loss of listed company. though it was standa rd practice for insurance contracts to exclude action against individual members . many began to implode and fall into ins olvency.[23] The legislation shortly gave way to a railway boom. "[21] The major error of this judgment was recognise d by the same magazine more than 70 years later. and just as company numbers had boomed. Salomon & Co. when it claimed that. was a change so vehemently and generally demanded. "[22] These two features .wer e subsequently codified into the landmark 1856 Joint Stock Companies Act. the numbers o f companies formed soared. perhaps. The last significant development in the history of companies was the decision of the House of Lords in Salomon v. (The principle that shareholders are liable to the corporation had been introduced in the Joint Stock Companies Act 1844).shareholders were still liable directly to creditors. a place of honour with Watt and Stephenson. State governments began to adopt more permissive corporate laws f rom the early 19th century. such as Carnegie's steel com pany and Rockefeller's Standard Oil. although these were all restrictive in design. The 1855 Act allowed limited liability to companies of more than 25 members (sha reholders). "[t]he ec onomic historian of the future. often with the intention of preventing corporations for gaining too much wealth and p ower. and other pioneers of the Industri al Revolution. avoided the corporate model for this reason (as a trust). This w as subsequently consolidated with a number of other statutes in the Companies Ac t 1862. Limited liability for insurance companies was allowed by the Companies Act 186 2. b ut just for the unpaid portion of their shares. . but should stand in the angle of investor. forming a corporation usually required an act of legislati on until the late 19th century. and that the liabilities of th e company were separate and distinct from those of its owners. concluded that to price for the stock of loss liste d company. In the United States. up to and including the time of the decision in Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd. where the House of Lords confirm ed the separate legal personality of the company. A study. Salomon & Co.a simple registration procedure and limited liability . title "Review on the Loss Problem of the Listed Corporations Based on t he Valuation". Insurance companies were excluded from the act.[25] New Jersey was the first state to adopt an "enabling" corporate law. In the later nineteenth century depression took hold. Many private firms. of which the import ance was so much overrated. The landmark case confirmed the distinct corporate ident ity of the company. we should not consider single one or several aspects of factors. and from then. which remained in force for the rest of the century. legislative and judicial opinion was opposed to t he notion that businessmen could escape accountability for their role in the fai ling businesses. . may be inclined to assign to the nameless in ventor of the principle of limited liability. considering various expected factors to e xplore the driving path for all kinds of heterogeneity of loss listed company. This prompted the English periodical The Economist to write in 1855 that "never. as applied to trading corporations .

is entit led to a quarter of the profit (or at least a quarter of the profit given to sha reholders as dividends) and has a quarter of the votes capable of being cast at general meetings. corporations are usually registered with the state. The 20th century saw a proliferation of laws allowing for the creation of corpor ations by registration across the world. Who a member is depends on what kind of corporation is involved.[25] The end of the 19th century saw the emergence of holding companies and corporate mergers creating larger corporations with dispersed shareholders. the selling of publicly owned (or 'nationalised') services and enterprises to corporations. Ownership and control[edit] A corporation is. In a joint-stock company the members are known as shareholders and each of their shar es in the ownership. In a worker cooperative the members are people who work for the cooperative. as well as a registered agent (a person or company designated to receive legal service of process). Delaware foll owed New Jersey's lead with the enactment of an enabling corporate statute. la . in which large corporations purc hased smaller corporations to expand their industrial base. Broad ly speaking there are two kinds of committee structure. Toda y. Another major post World War I shi ft was toward the development of conglomerates. The la w sometimes requires the corporation to designate its principal address. A two-tiered committee structure with a supervisory board and a managing board i s common in civil law countries. In some cases this will be a single individual but more commonly corporations are controlled by a committee or by committees. Countries beg an enacting anti-trust laws to prevent anti-competitive practices and corporatio ns were granted more legal rights and protections.al of attracting more business to the state. at least in theory. Starting in the 1980s.[citation needed] Generally. control and profits of the corporation is determined by the portion of shares in the company that they own. It may also be required to designate an agent or other legal repres entative of the corporation. which helped to drive economic booms in many countries before and after World War I. In a cre dit union the members are people who have accounts with the credit union. the latter being meant to supervise the former's management of the company. corporations were created by a charter granted by government. A single committee known as a board of directors is the method favored in most c ommon law countries.[28] Formation[edit] Historically. many countries with large state-owned corporations moved toward privatization. owned and controlled by its members. Thus a person who owns a quarte r of the shares of a joint-stock company owns a quarter of the company. In another kind of corporation the legal document which established the corporat ion or which contains its current rules will determine who the corporation's mem bers are. a corporation files articles of incorporation with the government. or national gov ernment and regulated by the laws enacted by that government. In 1899. province. Under this model the board of directors is composed of both executive and non-executive directors.[26] in 1896. but Delaware only became the leading corporate state after the enabling provisions o f the 1896 New Jersey corporate law were repealed in 1913.[27] The day-to-day activities of a corporation are typically controlled by individua ls appointed by the members. Registration is th e main prerequisite to the corporation's assumption of limited liability. Deregulation (reducing the regulation of corpo rate activity) often accompanied privatization as part of a laissez-faire policy .

and is almost always subject to laws of its host state p ertaining to employment. some corporations wer e named after their membership: for instance. civil actions. In some jurisdictio ns they are mandatory. corporate names include a term or an abbreviation that denote s the corporate status of the entity (for example. If a corporation operates ou tside its home state. which is assigned by the provincial or territorial gove rnment where the corporation incorporates. contracts. "The President and Fellows of Harv ard College. In most countries." in t he United States) or the limited liability of its members (for example. Historically. In Canada. Some jurisdictions do not allow the use of the word "company" alone to denote co rporate status. this possib ility is taken to its logical extreme: many smaller Canadian corporations have n o names at all. corporations in most jurisdictions have a distinct name that does not need to make reference to their membership. "Limited " or "Ltd. merely numbers based on a registration number (for example. "123 45678 Ontario Limited").[citation needed] See also[edit] Law Commercial law United States corporate law European corporate law German company law History of company law in the United Kingdom United Kingdom company law Other Anti-corporate activism Blocker corporation Community interest company Cooperative Corporate crime Corporate governance Corporate haven Corporate welfare Corporation sole Corporatism Corporatization Decentralized Autonomous Organization Evil corporation . it is often required to register with other governments as a foreign corporation." Nowadays. "Incorporated" or "Inc. These terms vary by jurisdiction and language."). and in others they are not. since the word "company" may refer to a partnership or some othe r form of collective ownership (in the United States it can be used by a sole pr oprietorship but this is not generally the case elsewhere).[29] Their use puts everybody on constructive notice that they are dealing with an entity whose liability is l imited: one can only collect from whatever assets the entity still controls when one obtains a judgment against it. crimes. and the like.[citation needed] The law of the jurisdiction in which a corporation operates will regulate most o f its internal activities. Once the articles are a pproved. as well as its finances. the amount of stock it is author ized to issue.ying out the general nature of the corporation. the corporation's directors meet to create bylaws that govern the inter nal functions of the corporation. and the names and addresses of directors.[citatio n needed] Naming[edit] Corporations generally have a distinct name. such as meeting procedures and officer positio ns.

Thomas B. The Honorable Company: A History of the English East India Company (MacMillan. Part 10 Jump up ^ e.com. VII Jump up ^ Paul Lyndon Davies (2010). Collins English Dictionary – Complet e & Unabridged 11th Edition.001. Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 Jump up ^ Harold Joseph Berman. South African Constitution Sect. The Law of Private Companies (2nd ed. 113 Jump up ^ A Smith.) [SBC 2002] CHAP TER 57. Bl oomsbury Professional. p. Jump up ^ Courtney. The Economic History of the Corporate F orm in Ancient India. G. vol. Act 1825.edu/~gerard/romanticpolitics/britisheastindia. As a corporation. Khanna (2005). Jump up ^ See. Jump up ^ e. ISBN 0674517768 Jump up ^ Vikramaditya S. para 107 Jump up ^ See Bubble Companies.html Jump up ^ Ibid.g. 215–16. 6 Geo 4. 4. Cambridge 1998). (2005). Reading the above. Jump up ^ John Keay. Retrieved December 07. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nation s (1776) Book V. a private com pany is regarded in law as having a separate legal personality from its sharehol ders (owners) and directors (managers).C. The Human Rights of Companies: Exploring the Structure of ECHR Protection (PDF). Company Law.Good standing Government-owned corporation History of competition law Incorporation (business) Megacorporation Multinational corporation Nationalisation Nonprofit corporation Organizational culture Preferred stock Privatisation Professional corporation (PC or P. Introduction to Company Law.) Public limited company (PLC) Shelf corporation Small business South Sea Bubble Tulip mania United States antitrust law Unlimited company Unlimited liability corporation Review on the Loss Problem of the Listed Corporations Based on the Valuation IJT EMT Notes[edit] Jump up ^ Pettet. pp. 1): The Formation of th e Western Legal Tradition. Marius (2006). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 2012. Pearson Education. Oxford Univers . University of Michigan. (2002). Oxford University Press. c 91 Jump up ^ See C Dickens. Blumberg.C. ISBN 978-0-1 9-928983-7. 1983. especially Art. Law and Revolution (vol.utk.8. Jump up ^ Om Prakash. European Commercial Enterprise in Pre-Colonial India (Camb ridge University Press. p. or body corporate. makes it possible to forget that the shareholders are the owners of t he company. etc.g. CollinsDictionary. at p. The Multinational Challenge to Corporation Law: T he Search for a New Corporate Personality. ch 1. Jump up ^ corporation. Retrieved 2 June 2012. New York 1991). (1993) discusses the controversial na ture of additional rights being granted to corporations. Jump up ^ Emberland.(4) Jump up ^ Phillip I. 151. Martin Chuzzlewit (1843) ch 27 Jump up ^ Report of the Parliamentary Committee on Joint Stock Companies (1844) in British Parliamentary Papers. 1. for example. Jump up ^ http://web. B.). the Business Corporations Act (B.

A and Lowry. The drafters of the 1977 revision of the California Genera l Corporation Law considered the possibility of forcing all California corporati ons to have a name indicating corporate status. Jump up ^ Economist. Cooke. Cengage Learning Jump up ^ Besley. Phillip I.41. December 18.. Sonsini. Vol. 4th ed. Hoover Institute. Problems (Seventh ed. Further reading[edit] A Comparative Bibliography: Regulatory Competition on Corporate Law Blumberg. (1993) Bromberg. (2010). Foundation. Ernst. p. Corporations (1904) Davis.ca. Impact Factor: 1. A. Int ernational Law Office. Ramesh Chandra. Joseph S. 1877–1914. MCMaster. but decided against it because o f the huge number of corporations that would have had to change their names. Greenwood's Case (1854) 3 De GM&G 459 Jump up ^ Graeme G. The Development of the Business Corporation in England (1936) Klein and Coffee. School of Management and Economi cs. Cengage Learning. Majumdar. Queen's University of Belfast.ity Press. C. Linda O. Corporations and Other Business Organizations: Cases. A credit union is a depository i nstitution that is owned by its depositors. Alan R. 1. Corporate Life in Ancient India. The Multinational Challenge to Corporation Law: The Search for a New Corporate Personality. Edwin Merrick. Bruce. 1976. Jump up ^ "Company & Commercial – Netherlands: In a nutshell – one-tier boards". D.. Jump up ^ Re Sea Fire and Life Assurance Co. Joint-stock Enterprise in France. John William. Scott. as quoted in Mahoney. International Journal of Trends in Economi cs Management and Technology (IJTEMT). 228–231. With Special Ref erence to Massachusetts. 2004). R. However. 5–15 — 5–16. See Harold Marsh. t he 1977 drafters were able to impose the current disclosure requirement for clos e corporations. 10 April 2012. Lawrence A. 105.. ISBN 9780324655889. "Review on the Loss Problem of the Listed Corporations Based on the Valuation". state of California is an example of a jurisdiction that does not require corporations to indicate corporate status in their names. Bishop. 1 (New York: As pen Publishers. ISBN 978-1-4224-7659-8 Jump up ^ The Law of Business Organizations.S. : From Privileged Company t o Modern Corporation (1979) Freund. . 1979. 1968. (1954) DuBois. C. The English Business Company after the Bubble Act.B. Lex isNexis. and Ann Yvonne Walker. at 1053. (1950) Davis. A. Eugene (2008). The Corporation in New Jersey: Business and Politics. In Defense of the Corporation. Alfred F.) . Marsh's California Corporation Law.. Corporation. except fo r close corporations. Corporations in Perspective. Robert. Oxford University Press ISBN 978-0-19 -928936-3 Dodd.. ICV: 6. 3. Roy Finkle. American Business Corporations until 1860. Essays in the Earlier History of American Corporations (1917) Dignam. June 2013.. (1920) . Materials. Larry W. The History of the Corporation (2003) Cadman. vol..14. pp. pp: 23-30 ^ Jump up to: a b Smiddy. p. Brigham. John P. Acheson & John D.. at 875. Brown. available at [1] and [2]. J (2006) Company Law.). The Legal Nature of the Corporation (1897) Hallis. Hunt. Turner. 241. supra. Charles.. 1926. (1 949) Conard. Jump up ^ The U. and the lack of any evidence that anyone had been harmed in California by entities whose corporate status was not immediately apparent from their names. Crane and Bromberg on Partnership. Business Organization and Finance: Legal and Economic Principl es.2 Iss ue. Corporate Personality: A Study in Jurisprudence (1930) Hessen. Cunningham. 2002. . Trust and Company: A Legal History. The Impact of Limited Liability on Ownership and Control: Irish Banking. and JIanying. Principles of Finance (4th ed.. Jump up ^ Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd [1897] AC 22 Jump up ^ Yong. Jr. (1938)\ Freedman. Frederick.

Radhe Shyam. Ronald E. (1974). W. Owen. Low. Robert. (1984) Barnet. R. Global Reach: The Power of the Multin ational Corporation. Albert. Scottish and Irish Joint-Stock Companies to 1720 (1912) Sobel. The Age of Giant Corporations: a Microeconomic History of America n Business. Sussex Academic Press. In David R. 'Contract or Concession? An Essay on the History of Corporate Law' ( 2000) 34 Ga. Constitution and Finance of English.svgCompanies portal Authority control GND: 4128521-9 Categories: CompaniesBusiness lawCorporate lawCorporationsLegal entitiesTypes of business entity Navigation menu Not logged inTalkContributionsCreate accountLog inArticleTalkReadEditView histor y Search Go Main page Contents Featured content Current events Random article Donate to Wikipedia Wikipedia store Interaction . The Corporation under Russian Law. A Treatise on the Law of Corporations (1793–1794) J Micklethwait and A Wooldridge. Adrian. New York: Modern Library. 2008.Means.). Concise Ency clopedia of Economics (2nd ed.. Law Review 873 PI Blumberg. Corporation Suffix Requirements by State [show] v t e Aspects of corporations [show] v t e Aspects of workplaces Factory 1b. John and Wooldridge. Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765) 455–473 External links[edit] Wikiquote has quotations related to: Corporations US Corporate Law at Wikibooks an Audio from a talk about the history of corporations and the English Law by Ba rrister Daniel Bennett History of Corporations U. The Historical Foundations of Company Law (Sweet and Maxwell 1923) 21 P Frentrop. Hessen. : A Study in Tsarist Economic P olicy (1991) Rungta. Thomas. Robert Charles. 2003. A History of Corporate Governance 1602–2002 (Brussels et al. "Conflict and Creativity at Work: Human Roots of Corporate Li fe. New York: Simon & Schuster. Principles of Modern Company Law (6th edn Sweet and Max well 1997) chapters 2-4 RR Formoy. "Corporations". ISBN 978-1-84519-272-3 PG Mahoney. 2003) S Kyd. The company: A short history of a revolutionary idea (Modern Library 2003) W Blackstone. 1851–1900. (19 70) Scott. Muller. The Company: a Short History of a Rev olutionary Idea. Richard. The Multinational Challenge to Corporation Law (1993) PL Davies and LCB Gower.). Henderson (ed. ISBN 978-0865976658. Underdevelopment and the Development of Law: Corporations and Corporation Law in Nineteenth-century Colombia. Indianapolis: Library of Economics and Liberty. (1980) Micklethwait. Robert (2008). OCLC 237794267.S. The Rise of the Business Corporation in India.

Help About Wikipedia Community portal Recent changes Contact page Tools What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Permanent link Page information Wikidata item Cite this page Print/export Create a book Download as PDF Printable version Languages Afrikaans Български Bosanski Brezhoneg Català Cebuano Čeština Deutsch Eesti Español Esperanto Français Galego Հայերեն Hrvatski Italiano ‫תירבע‬ Kreyòl ayisyen Latina Lëtzebuergesch Lietuvių Magyar Македонски Bahasa Melayu 日本語 Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча Polski Português Română Русский Shqip Simple English Slovenščina .

a non-profit organization.. Privacy policyAbout WikipediaDisclaimersContact WikipediaDevelopersMobile viewWi kimedia Foundation Powered by MediaWiki . you agree to the Terms of Use and P rivacy Policy. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.Српски / srpski Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски Suomi Svenska Tagalog ไทย Українська Winaray ‫שידִיי‬ 語 Edit links This page was last modified on 27 December 2015. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation. at 20:03. I nc. By using this site. add itional terms may apply.