الهدر والتحيز الهيكلي في إطار الشركات (دراسة في القانون الأمريكي مع الإشارة إلى القانون العراقي)

قائمة المراجع

: المراجع العربية

أ: الكتب

ـ كمال الدين محمد بن محمد البابرتي، العناية شرح الهداية، ج5، ط1، دار الكتب العلمية، بيروت، 2007.

ـ مجيد حميد العنبكي، المدخل الى دراسة النظام القانوني الانكليزي، منشورات الدائرة القانونية، بغداد، 1990.

ـ وهبة الزحيلي، الفقه الاسلامي وادلته، ج4، ط2، دار الفكر للطباعة والتوزيع والنشر، دمشق، 1985.

ب: البحوث

ـ ابراهيم عنتر، السفه في الفقه الاسلامي والقانون، مجلة جامعة تكريت للعلوم القانونية والسياسية، العدد الثاني، المجلد الاول، تكريت، 2009.

ـ رعد هاشم التميمي، دور الالتزام الائتماني في معالجة مشاكل تعسف الاشخاص في استعمال السلطة في اطار علاقات القانون الخاص، دراسة مقارنة بين القانونين الانكليزي والعراقي، مجلة كلية الحقوق جامعة النهرين، العدد ب1، المجلد 19، بغداد، 2017.

ـ شهيدة قادة، اثر استزراع القوانين الاجنبية على الثقافة القانونية الوطنية، حوليات جامعة الجزائر، عدد خاص، المجلد 35، الجزائر، 2021.

ـ يزيد انيس نصير، مرحلة ما قبل ابرام العقد: دراسة مقارنة: الجزء الثاني: عقد التفاوض بحسن نية، مجلة المنارة للبحوث والدراسات، جامعة ال البيت، المجلد 9، العدد الثالث، عمان، 2003.

ج: الأطاريح والرسائل

ـ شيماء غالب العزاوي، حوكمة الشركات دراسة تحليلية مقارنة لشركات البنوك وشركات الاستثمار الهرمي، رسالة ماجستير مقدمة إلى كلية الحقوق والعلوم السياسية بجامعة بيروت العربية، بيروت، 2013

English references

A-Books

-Bebchuk, Lucian A., and Jesse M. Fried. Pay without performance: The unfulfilled promise of executive compensation. Harvard University Press, 2004.

-Dravis, Bruce F.. The Role of Independent Directors After Sarbanes-Oxley. United States: American Bar Association, Section of Business Law, 2007.

-Goulding, Simon. Company law. 1999.

-Lane, Marc J.. Representing Corporate Officers, Directors, Managers, and Trustees. United States: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2010.

-Lane, Marc J.. Representing Corporate Officers, Directors, Managers, and Trustees. United States: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2010.

-Okanigbuan Jnr, Francis A. Corporate Takeover Law and Management Discipline. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis, 2019.

-Smith, D. Gordon., Williams, Cynthia A.., Kim, Sung Eun (Summer). Business Organizations: Cases, Problems, and Case Studies [Connected EBook with Study Center]. United States: Aspen Publishing, 2022.

-You, Jeehye. Legal Perspectives on Corporate Social Responsibility: Lessons from the United States and Korea. India: Springer India, 2015.

B-Research papers

-Bahri, Mireille. “The Magic of Disney: Turning Best Practices into Standards of Performance.” Seton Hall L. Rev. 37 (2006): 1075.

-Barnes, Victoria.” Legal Transplants, Law Books, and Anglo-American Corporate Fiduciary Duties.” Hastings Bus. LJ 16 (2020): 145.

-Bertea, Stefano. “Certainty, reasonableness and argumentation in law.” Argumentation 18, no. 4 (2004): 465-478.

-Booth, Richard A. “Business Purpose Doctrine and the Limits of Equal Treatment in Corporation Law.” Sw. LJ 38 (1984): 853.

-Bruner, Christopher M. “Is the Corporate Director's Duty of Care a Fiduciary Duty-Does It Matter.” Wake Forest L. Rev. 48 (2013): 1027.

-Cain, Matthew D., Sean J. Griffith, Robert J. Jackson Jr, and Steven Davidoff Solomon. “Does Revlon matter? An empirical and theoretical study.” Calif. L. Rev. 108 (2020): 1683.

-Caywood, Steven C. “Wasting the corporate waste doctrine: How the doctrine can provide a viable solution in controlling excessive executive compensation.” Michigan Law Review (2010): 111-136.

-Cope, Malcolm. “The Constructive Trust as a Remedy for Mistake, Fraud, Duress and Undue Influence.” Queensland Inst. Tech. LJ 3 (1987): 111.

-Duggin, Sarah Helene, and Stephen M. Goldman. “Restoring Trust in Corporate Directors: The Disney Standard and the New Good Faith.” Am. UL Rev. 56 (2006): 211.

-Eisenberg, Melvin A. “The Duty of Good Faith in American Corporate Law.” European Company and Financial Law Review 3, no. 1 (2006): 1-44.

-Finch, Vanessa. “Company directors: who cares about skill and care?.” The Modern Law Review 55, no. 2 (1992): 179-214.

-Fisch, Jill E. “The peculiar role of the Delaware courts in the competition for corporate charters.” U. Cin. L. Rev. 68 (1999): 1061.

-Furlow, Clark W. “Good faith, fiduciary duties, and the business judgment rule in Delaware.” Utah L. Rev. (2009): 1061.

-Furlow, Clark W. “Reflections on the Revlon Doctrine.” U. Pa. J. Bus. L. 11 (2008): 519.

-Gilson, Ronald J., and Reinier Kraakman. “What Triggers Revlon.” Wake Forest L. Rev. 25 (1990): 37.

-Giraldo, Carlos Andrés Laguado. “Factors governing the application of the business judgment rule: an empirical study of the US, UK, Australia and the EU.” Vniversitas 55, no. 111 (2006): 15-166.

-Gold, Andrew S. “A Decision Theory Approach to the Business Judgment Rule: Reflections on Disney, Good Faith, and Judicial Uncertainty.” Md. L. Rev. 66 (2006): 398.

-Gold, Andrew S. “The New Concept of Loyalty in Corporate Law.” UC Davis L. Rev. 43 (2009): 457.

-Greenfield, Kent. “Law, Politics, and the Erosion of Legitimacy in the Delaware Courts.” NYL Sch. L. Rev. 55 (2010): 481.

-Griffith, Sean J. “Good faith business judgment: A theory of rhetoric in corporate law jurisprudence.” Duke LJ 55 (2005): 1.

-Gubler, Zachary J. “What's the Deal with Revlon?.” Ind. LJ 96 (2020): 429.

-Hansen, Charles. “The Technicolor Case--A Lost Opportunity.” Del. J. Corp. L. 19 (1994): 617.p628.

-Hesselink, Martijn W. “The concept of good faith.” TOWARDS A EUROPEAN CIVIL CODE, FOURTH REVISED AND EXPANDED EDITION (2010): 619-649.

-Hill, Claire A., and Brett H. McDonnell. “Disney, good faith, and structural bias.” J. Corp. L. 32 (2006): 833.

-Jones, Renee M. “The role of good faith in Delaware: how open-ended standards help Delaware preserve its edge.” NYL Sch. L. Rev. 55 (2010): 499.

-Kostant, Peter C. “Meaningful Good Faith: Managerial Motives and the Duty to Obey the Law.” NYL Sch. L. Rev. 55 (2010): 421.

-Leslie, Melanie B. “Trusting trustees: fiduciary duties and the limits of default rules.” Geo. Lj 94 (2005): 67.

-Manesh, Mohsen. “Nearing 30, Is Revlon Showings Its Age?.” Wash. & Lee L. Rev. Online 71 (2014): 107.p134.

-Mariani, John F., Christopher W. Kammerer, and Nancy Guffey-Landers. “Understanding Fiduciary Duty.” FLA. BJ 84 (2010): 20-21.

-Miller, Alan D., and Ronen Perry. "Good faith performance." Iowa L. Rev. 98 (2012): 689.

-Musy, Alberto M. “The good faith principle in contract law and the precontractual duty to disclose: comparative analysis of new differences in legal cultures.” Global Jurist Advances 1, no. 1 (2001).

-Prickett, William, and Ronald A. Brown Jr. “Cede v. Technicolor: The Supreme Court Reilluminates Existing Lines of Delaware's Level Playing Field.” Del. J. Corp. L. 19 (1994): 593.

-Sale, Hillary A. “Monitoring Caremark's Good Faith.” Del. j. corp. l. 32 (2007): 719.Kastler, Jamie L. “The Problem with Waste: Delaware's Lenient Treatment of Waste Claims at the Demand Stage of Derivative Litigation.” Minn. L. Rev. 95 (2010): 1899.

-Teubner, Gunther. “Legal irritants: good faith in British law or how unifying law ends up in new divergencies.” The Modern Law Review 61, no. 1 (1998): 11-32.

-Velasco, Julian. “Structural bias and the need for substantive review.” Wash. ULQ 82 (2004): 821.

-Webb, Charlie. “The myth of the remedial constructive trust.” Current Legal Problems 69, no. 1 (2016): 353-376.

-White-Smith, Morgan. “Revisiting Revlon: Should Judicial Scrutiny of Mergers Depend on the Method of Payment?.” The University of Chicago Law Review 79, no. 3 (2012): 1177-1214.

G-Decisions

-Aronson v. Lewis, 473 A.2d 805, 812 Del. 19841 (1984) .

-Attorney General for Hong Kong v Reid (New Zealand) (UKPC) [1993] UKPC 2.

-Beam ex rel. M. Stewart Living v. Stewart, 845 A.2d 1040 (Del. 2004).

-Brehm v. Eisner, 746 A.2d 244 (Del. 2000).

-Cede & Co. v. Technicolor, Inc., 634 A.2d 345, 361 Delaware 1993 (Del. 1993).

-Fogelson v. American Woolen Co., 170 F.2d 660 (2d Cir. 1948).

-Glazer v. Zapata Corp., 658 A.2d 176 (Del. Ch. 1993).

-Gottlieb v. Heyden Chemical Corp., 90 A.2d 660, 33 Del. Ch. 82, 33 Del. 177 (1952).

-In re Walt Disney Co. Derivative Lit., 731 A.2d 342 (Del. Ch. 1998).

-In re Walt Disney Co. Derivative Litigation, 825 A.2d 275, 278 Del. Ch. 2003 (Ch. 2003).

-In re Walt Disney Co. Derivative Litigation, 906 A.2d 27 (Del. 2006).

-In re Walt Disney Co. Derivative Litigation, 907 A.2d 693 (Del. Ch. 2005).

-Kahn v. Sullivan, 594 A.2d 48 (Del. 1991).

-Keech v Sandford [1726] EWHC J76.

-Lewis v. Vogelstein, 699 A.2d 327, 336 Del. Ch. 1997 (Ch. 1997).

-McQuillen v. National Cash Register Co., 27 F. Supp. 639 (D. Md. 1939).

-Michelson v. Duncan, 407 A.2d 211, 224 Del. 1979 (1979).

-Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc., 506 A.2d 173 (Del. 1986)

-Rogers v. Hill, 289 U.S. 582, 53 S. Ct. 731, 77 L. Ed. 1385 (1933).

-Rosenblatt v. Getty Oil Co., 493 A.2d 929 (Del. 1985).

-Stone v. Ritter, 911 A.2d 362, 370 Del. 2006 (2006).

-Theodora Holding Corporation v. Henderson, 257 A.2d 398 (Del. Ch. 1969).

-Winkelman v. General Motors Corporation, 44 F. Supp. 960 (S.D.N.Y. 1942).