Applicability of Contractarian Theory of a Firm to Determination of Position of Minority Shareholders of Russian Non-Public Corporations
( Pp. 89-93)

Goal. In the article applicability of contractarian theory of a firm to analysis of status of minority shareholders of non-public corporations is researched. The theory was elaborated in foreign literature (for instance, in the articles of F.H. Easterbrook and D.R. Fischel), but is still significantly unknown to Russian law science, aspects of its relations with Russian law was not examined. Conclusions. It is noted in the article that the theory see minority shareholders as subjects of relations regulated by voluntary acts (contracts) of different legal nature, which are made irrationally and require state intervention. The conclusion that Russian law is based upon the premises which are not contradictory to the contractarianism is made on the basis of analysis of the positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and Russian legislation. Russian law also sees corporate relations of members as based upon transaction which as contracts are voluntary, but sometimes require state intervention. Essence of contracts, according to contractarianism, is not reduced to legal relationships, but anyway has legal significance. It is also proves applicability of the theory in Russia. Theoretical significance. For the first time the conclusion about possibility of application of contractarian theory is made due to significant uniformity of positions of the theory and Russian law. The theory provides alternative economic view for the law scholars as to position of minority shareholders as similar to the position of a weak party of a contract, not a weak party of corporate relations.

Ledenev V.V., (2022), APPLICABILITY OF CONTRACTARIAN THEORY OF A FIRM TO DETERMINATION OF POSITION OF MINORITY SHAREHOLDERS OF RUSSIAN NON-PUBLIC CORPORATIONS. Economic Problems and Legal Practice, 1 => 89-93.

Lomakin D.V. Fiduciary duties of parties of corporate relations: pro et contra // Civil law. 2019. № 4. P. 3-8.
Moskevich G.E., Podkopalov I.A. Development of idea of a corporation in aconomic analysis of law // Russian joint-stock companies law: collection of articles to 25 anniversary of enaction. M. : Statut, 2021. P. 158-243.
Tarasenko O.A. Phenomena of a state as an entrepreneur // Law and economics. 2013. № 5. P. 68-71.
Chuprunov I.S. The beginning of «new life» in Russian corporate law. The commentary to the Decision of Chamber for Commercial Disputes of the Supreme Court of Russian Federation of 11.06.2020 № 306-ES19-24912 // Herald of Economic Justice. 2020. № 8. P. 25-68.
Easterbrook F. H. The Economic Structure of Corporate Law. / F.H. Easterbrook, D.R. Fischel. London., Harvard University Press, 1991. 370 p.
Talbot L. Critical Company Law. / L. Talbot. Routledge-Cavendish, 2008. 393 p.
Bodie M.T., Hayden G. M. The Uncorporation and the Unraveling of Nexus of Contracts theory // Michigan Law Review. 2011. vol. 109. issue 6. P. 1127-1144.
Bratton W.W. Jr. Nexus of Contracts Corporation: A Critical Appraisal // Cornell Law Review. 1989. Vol. 74. issue 3. P. 407-465.
Brudney V. Corporate Governance, Agency Costs, and the Rhetoric of Contract // Columbia Law Review. Vol. 85. № 7. P. 1403-1444.
Butler H.N., Ribstein L.E. Opting Out of Fiduciary Duties: A Response to the Anti-Contractarians // Washington Law Review. 1990. Vol. 65. № 1. P. 1-72.
Coffee J. C. Jr. No Exit : Opting Out, The Contractual Theory of the Corporation, and the Special Case of Remedies // Columbia Law School. 1988. Vol. 53. № 4. P. 919-974.
Jensen M.C., Meckling W.H. Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure // Journal of Financial Economics. 1976. vol. 3. №4. P. 305-360.
Means B.A Contractual Approach to Shareholder Oppression Law // Fordham Law Review. 2011. vol. 79. issue 3. P. 1161-1211.

corporate law, non-public corporation, minority shareholder, contractarian theory, law and economics.