Le droit des valeurs mobilières et le retour des compagnies publiques au statut de compagnie privée
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the « going private » phenomenon as it has developed in the United States and Canada over the past few years as well as its implications for Quebec law. « Going private » transactions involve different means of corporate reorganization that allow a few controlling shareholders to eliminate, without adequate compensation, most other shareholders from further participation in a corporate body. Such transactions are of interest to those who study company law or securities law as the methods employed often go beyond the spirit of both. The author attempts to demonstrate the role each can play in preventing abuses of minority rights. Corporate law, while ensuring majority rule, seeks to protect individual shareholders while securities law has developed to avoid the manipulation of individual shareholders in transactions involving securities. The author believes that « going private » should take place only if full disclosure of the aims of the controlling group have been given to the minority, if there is a valid business purpose for going private and if the eliminated shareholders are treated fairly. Examples of these criteria are to be found in recent American, Canadian and Quebec jurisprudence as well as in the policy statements of the Securities Exchange Commission and the Ontario Securities Commission. These are analysed in relation to present Quebec law. The author suggests that the Quebec Securities Commission should adopt a policy statement on « going private » similar to that of the OSC. This would be a better means of ensuring that the Quebec Securities Commission fulfill its role of promoting investor protection and an efficient securities market.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".