\n| \u5831\u544a\u8981\u7d04<\/td>\n | The Historical Roots of the Notion of Company in Continental European Law
\nWhereas the common law develops a plural conception of companies, distinguishing between different corporate forms such as partnerships and companies, continental European law considers the company as a unitary concept. In the civil law tradition, the French soci\u00e9t\u00e9, the German Gesellschaft, the Italian societ\u00e0 and the Spanish sociedad are all based on common principles, which then branch out to give rise to a typology of companies. These companies are based on simple contracts, whether they are small partnerships or large capital companies listed on the financial markets. This unitary concept has its roots in a legal history that goes back to Roman law. As early as classical times, Roman jurisconsults defined a societas as a contract by which several partners pool their contributions with the goal of making profits or sharing losses. Following the rediscovery of Roman law at the turn of the 11th and 12th centuries, medieval doctrine adopted this notion as its own. With the development of the first joint-stock companies in modern times, jurists deformed the original notion of the company to adapt it to the new needs of business and the development of intercontinental trade, without ever going back on the unity of the concept, which was enshrined in most of the codifications of continental Europe.L\u00e0 o\u00f9 le common law d\u00e9veloppe une conception plurielle des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s en distinguant diff\u00e9rentes formes sociales comme le partnership ou la company, les droits d\u2019Europe continentale envisagent la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 sous la forme d\u2019une notion unitaire. Dans la tradition de civil law, la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 fran\u00e7aise, la Gesellschaft allemande, la societ\u00e0 italienne ou la sociedad espagnole se rattachent toutes \u00e0 des principes communs qui se ramifient ensuite pour donner naissance \u00e0 une typologie de soci\u00e9t\u00e9s. Ces soci\u00e9t\u00e9s reposent d\u2019ailleurs sur de simples contrats, qu\u2019il s\u2019agisse de petites soci\u00e9t\u00e9s de personnes ou de grandes soci\u00e9t\u00e9s de capitaux cot\u00e9es sur les march\u00e9s financiers. Cette notion unitaire trouve ses racines dans une histoire juridique qui remonte au droit romain. D\u00e8s l\u2019\u00e9poque classique, les jurisconsultes romains d\u00e9finissent en effet la societas comme un contrat par lequel plusieurs associ\u00e9s mettent en commun des apports dans le but de r\u00e9aliser des profits ou de r\u00e9partir entre eux les pertes de l\u2019activit\u00e9. Apr\u00e8s la red\u00e9couverte du droit romain \u00e0 la charni\u00e8re du XIe et du XIIe si\u00e8cle, la doctrine m\u00e9di\u00e9vale reprend cette notion et se l\u2019approprie. Avec le d\u00e9veloppement des premi\u00e8res soci\u00e9t\u00e9s de capitaux \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9poque moderne, ces m\u00eames juristes d\u00e9forment la notion originelle de soci\u00e9t\u00e9 pour l\u2019adapter aux nouveaux besoins des affaires et au d\u00e9veloppement du grand commerce intercontinental, sans jamais revenir sur l\u2019unit\u00e9 du concept qui sera d\u2019ailleurs inscrit dans la plupart des codifications d\u2019Europe continentale.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\u7b2c5\u56de\u5546\u6cd5\u7814\u7a76\u4f1a \u4eca\u56de\u306e\u5546\u6cd5\u7814\u7a76\u4f1a\u306f\uff0c\u539f\u5247\u3068\u3057\u3066\u5bfe\u9762\u3067\u958b\u50ac\u3057\u307e\u3059\u3002\u5fc5\u8981\u306a\u65b9\u306b\u306fzoom\u3067\u306e\u4e2d\u7d99\u3082\u884c\u3044\u307e\u3059\u304c\uff08\u4e8b\u524d\u306b\u5e79\u4e8b\u307e\u3067\u7533\u3057\u3053\u3093\u3067\u304f\u3060\u3055\u3044\uff09\uff0czoom\u3067\u306e\u4e2d\u7d99\u306f\u88dc\u52a9\u7684\u306a\u3082\u306e\u3067\u3042\u308b\u3053\u3068\u3092\u3042\u3089\u304b\u3058\u3081\u3054\u4e86\u627f\u304f\u3060\u3055\u3044\u3002 \u65e5\u6642 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[4],"tags":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.tohoku.ac.jp\/research\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1697"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.tohoku.ac.jp\/research\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.tohoku.ac.jp\/research\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.tohoku.ac.jp\/research\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.tohoku.ac.jp\/research\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1697"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.tohoku.ac.jp\/research\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1697\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1748,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.tohoku.ac.jp\/research\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1697\/revisions\/1748"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.tohoku.ac.jp\/research\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1697"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.tohoku.ac.jp\/research\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1697"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.tohoku.ac.jp\/research\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1697"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}} |