Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Implementing the Takeover Directive in the UK

By Jonathan Mukwiri


The removal of barriers to takeover activities has been the driving force behind\ud the Directive since its initial draft appeared in 1974. The Directive was\ud adopted in April 2004, and implemented in the UK on 20 May 2006. The main objectives of the Directive are twofold: first, to protect investors, and secondly, to harmonise takeover regulation in Europe. These objectives are fundamentally aimed at reinforcing free movement of capital. Whether and how the Directive achieves its driving force and objectives is the subject of this thesis. \ud At the heart of this thesis are three arguments. The first is that the Directive is unlikely to have a significant impact on how takeovers are regulated in the UK. This is because the Directive, as implemented by the Companies Act 2006, essentially maintains the regulatory status quo under the Panel and the Code. Despite changing from self-regulation to statutory regulation, the Panel remains the maker, interpreter and judge of its own takeover rules. \ud The second argument is that the Directive is unlikely to harmonise takeover regulations in Europe. The Directive is not detailed; it gives leeway to Member States to impose stringent rules beyond the minimum standards, and it allows Member States to opt out/into the core provisions contained therein, which in turn defeats any harmonisation effect. \ud The third argument is that, whereas the Directive was watered down by compromises that made its core provisions optional, and to that extent it is hardly a triumph, its strength can be revived by reading it to conform with free movement of capital under the EC Treaty. To the extent that the Directive is read to conform to the EC Treaty, it is likely to be revived to fulfil its driving force of removing barriers to takeover activities. However, a legalistic approach amid a rather politically volatile regulatory framework of takeovers, is problematic

Publisher: University of Leicester
Year: 2008
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (2005). Andenas and Others, ‘Free movement of capital and national company law’ doi
  2. (1996). Andenas, ‘European Take-over Regulation and the City Code’
  3. (2004). Building EU Securities Market doi
  4. (2004). Chapter 2: Tactical Litigation and Defences in Takeovers 430 P Scott, The Takeover Panel Report on the year ended 31
  5. (1982). Chapter 7: EU Capital markets and Takeover Regulation Case 15/81
  6. (2004). EU Company Law at the cross-roads’ in Guido Ferrarini (ed) Reforming company and takeover law in Europe (OUP,
  7. (2005). EU Directive fails to harmonise takeovers’
  8. (2005). European company law, the Court of Justice and the Directives’ doi
  9. (2006). Financial Market Regulation in the Post-Financial Services Action Plan era’ doi
  10. (2004). Mandatory bids, squeeze-out and the dynamics of the tender offer process’ doi
  11. (2005). Optionality Arrangements and Reciprocity in the European Takeover Directive’ doi
  12. (2003). said by Commissioner Frits Bolkestein.
  13. (2004). The Directive on Takeover Bids – Not Worth the Paper It’s Written On?’ doi
  14. (1992). The Rise and Rise of the Hostile Takeover’ in Hopt and Wymeersch (eds), European Takeovers (Butterworths,
  15. (2004). The Takeover Panel Report on the year ended 31
  16. (2006). which the Member States can regulate their national economy – every country remains cautious about giving up sovereignty in this context.546 This probably 542 Blanaid Clarke,

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.