Melbourne Law School - Theses

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The Australian Takeovers Panel: an effective forum for dispute resolution?
    Armson, Emma Jane ( 2017)
    The Australian Takeovers Panel (‘the Panel’) has been the primary forum for resolving takeover disputes since reforms to Australian corporate law on 13 March 2000. This thesis makes a sustained scholarly contribution to the evaluation of takeover regulation under Australian corporate law by analysing the extent to which the Panel has been an effective forum for dispute resolution. The thesis addresses two overarching research questions, namely to determine the criteria that should be used to measure the effectiveness of the Panel in resolving takeover disputes and the extent to which the Panel has satisfied these criteria. The work in the thesis is original and is based on a detailed evaluation of the Panel’s decisions from 13 March 2000 to 30 June 2016. It is the first major academic study of the Panel since it became the primary forum for resolving takeover disputes. Chapter 1 provides an explanation of the key concepts relevant to the analysis in the thesis, explains the research questions and methodology used to answer them, and sets out the structure of the thesis. Chapter 2 informs the assessment of the effectiveness of the Panel in the thesis by analysing the policy goals underlying the historical development of Australian takeover regulation and the establishment of the Panel and its predecessors. Chapter 3 examines the historical development of the Panel on Takeovers and Mergers (‘UK Panel’), which is the key comparator for the Australian Panel for the purposes of establishing the criteria to be applied to determine the effectiveness of the Panel. It concludes that the three objectives for the UK Panel, namely speed, flexibility and certainty, can be used as the criteria to be applied to the Australian Panel to determine its effectiveness. Chapter 4 assesses the speed of Panel decision-making based on an empirical analysis of the timing of the announcement of Panel decisions and publication of the reasons. It concludes that the Panel has achieved a strong form of speed overall. Chapter 5 assesses flexibility of Panel decision-making based on procedural and substantive flexibility. It concludes that the Panel has achieved a strong form of flexibility overall. Chapter 6 assesses the certainty of Panel decision-making based on consistency and finality of decision-making. It concludes that the Panel has achieved a medium to strong form of certainty overall. Given this, Chapter 7 concludes that the Panel has provided an effective forum for dispute resolution in light of the aims of the CLERP reforms.