Referências bibliograficas das Cartas Dynamo n. 71 e 72
- Ahdieh, R. (2009) The (misunderstood) genius of American corporate law. Emory University School of Law, research paper n. 10-57.
- Armour, J., Skeel, D. (2006) Who whites the rules for hostile takeovers, and why? – The peculiar divergence of US and UK takeover regulation. Center for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
- Armour, J. et alli (2010) A comparative analysis of hostile takeover regimes in the US, UK and Japan (with implications for emerging markets).
- Armour, J. et alli (2011) The evolution of hostile takeover regimes in develop and emerging markets: an analytical framework. Harvard International Law Journal, vol. 52.
- Bebchuk, L. (1992) Federalism and the corporation: the desirable limits on state competition in corporate law. Harvard Law Review, vol. 105. n.7.
- Bebchuk, L. (2002) The case against board veto in corporate takeovers. The University of Chicago Law Review, vol. 69.
- Bebchuk, L., Ferrel, A. (1999) Federalism and Takeover law: the race to protect managers from takeovers.
- Bebchuk, L., Ferrel, A. (2001) A new approach to takeover law and regulatory competition. NBER, working paper n. 8148.
- Bebchuk, L., Ferrel, A. (2002) On takeover law and regulatory competition. Harvard Law School. Harvard Law School, discussion paper n. 363.
- Bebchuk, L., Hamdani, A. (2002) Optimal defaults for corporate law evolution. Harvard Law School, discussion paper n. 343.
- Bebchuk, L., Hamdani, A. (2002) Vigorous race or leisurely walk: reconsidering the competition over corporate charters. Harvard Law School, discussion paper n. 376.
- Black, B. (2001) The principal fiduciary duties of boards of directors. Presentation at 3th Asian Roundtable on Corporate Governance.
- Black, B., Kraakman, R. (2002) Delaware´s takeover law: the uncertain search for hidden value. Northwestern University Law Review, vol 96, n. 2.
- Comissão de Valores Imobiliarios (2007) Instrução n. 461.
- Comissão de Valores Imobiliarios (2010) Instrução n. 487.
- Davidoff, S. (2007) The SEC and the failure of federal takeover regulation. Florida State University Law Review, vol n. 34.
- Davies, H (2004) What´s left for self-regulation.
- Davies, P. at alli. (2010) The takeover directive as a protectionist tool? ECGI, working paper n. 141.
- Eizirik, N., at alli (2010), Proposta de criação do CAF, submetida à BM&Bovespa.
- Gorga, E (2008) Changing the paradigm of stock ownership from concentrated towards dispersed ownership? Evidence from Brazil and consequences for emerging countries. Cornell Law Library, FGV Law School-SP.
- Greenwood, D. (2005) Democracy and Delaware: the mysterious race to the top/bottom. University of Utah, S.J. Quinney College of Law.
- Ferrarini, G., Miller, G. (2009) Takeover regulation in the United States and Europe. Cornell International Law Journal, vol. 42.
- Friedlander, J. (2008) Overturn Time-Warner three different ways. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law, vol. 33.
- Gilson, R. (2000) Unocal fifteen years later (and what we can do about it).
- Hamermesh, L. (2006) The policy foundations of Delaware corporate law. Columbia Law Review, working paper, vol 106, n. 7, forthcoming.
- Hamermesh, L. (2007) How we make law in Delaware, and what to expect from us in the future. Journal of Business & Technology Law, vol 2.
- Hill, J. (2010) Takeovers, poison pills and protectionism in comparative corporate governance. University of Sidney, Faculty Law.
- Iantosca, J. (2007) corporate board authority in takeover bids: a comparative analysis of the EU and US approaches. University of Lund, Faculty of Law.
- Jordan, C, Hughes, P. (2007) Which way for market institutions: the fundamental question of self-regulation. Berkeley Business Law Journal.
- Jr, Leo S. (2005) The Delaware way: how we do corporate law and some of the new challenges we (and Europe) face. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law, vol. 30.
- Jr, Lewis B. (2007) Why corporations choose Delaware? Delaware Department of State.
- Kahan, M., Rock, E. (2005) Symbiotic federalism and the structure of corporate law. Vanderbilt Law Review, vol.58.
- Kihlstrom, R., Watcher, M. (2005) Corporate policy and the coherence of Delaware takeover law. University of Pennsylvania Law School.
- Lipton, M. at alli (2001) pills, polls and professors: a reply to professor Gilson. New York University, Center for Law and Business.
- Magnuson, W. (2009) Takeover regulation in the US and Europe: an institution approach. Harvard Law School.
- Mukwiri, J. (2011) The myth of tactical litigation in UK takeovers. Durham University Research.
- Nilsen, A. (2004) The EU takeover directive and the competitiveness of European industry. OCGG Economy analysis, n. 1.
- Patricia, K (2011) Use of derivatives by shareholder activists. Torys on M&A.
- Roe, M. (1994) Strong managers, weak owners: The political roots of American corporate finance. Princeton University Press.
- Roe, M. (2005) Delaware´s Politics. Harvard Law School, discussion paper n. 511.
- Roe, M. (2009) Delaware and Washington as corporate lawmakers. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law, vol n. 34.
- Rosenzweig, B. (2007) Private versus public regulation: a comparative analysis of British and American takeover controls. Duke University School of Law.
- Securities and Exchange Commission (2011) Beneficial ownership reporting requirements and security-based swaps.
- Scalia, A. (1995) Common-law courts in a civil-law system: the role of US Federal Couts in interpreting the Constitution and laws. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, Princeton University.
- Swift, J. (2011) Takeover panel sweetens code for targets after Cadbury lesson. Thelawer.com.
- The Panel on Takeovers and Mergers (2009). The Takeover Code. Ninth edition.
- The Panel on Takeovers and Mergers (2010) Review of certain aspects of the regulation of takeover bids.
- US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (2008) CSX x The Children´s Investment Fund Mgmt.
- Williams, A. (2004) An economics theory of self-regulation. London School of Economics and Political Science.
