University of Hertfordshire

From the same journal

By the same authors

Legal Personhood and the Firm: Avoiding Anthropomorphism and Equivocation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Legal Personhood and the Firm: Avoiding Anthropomorphism and Equivocation. / Gindis, David.

In: Journal of Institutional Economics, Vol. 12, No. 3, 01.09.2016, p. 499-513.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{1b36b557a9dd48a8a227b440897e821c,
title = "Legal Personhood and the Firm: Avoiding Anthropomorphism and Equivocation",
abstract = "From the legal point of view, {\textquoteleft}person{\textquoteright} is not co-extensive with {\textquoteleft}human being{\textquoteright}. Nor is it synonymous with {\textquoteleft}rational being{\textquoteright} or {\textquoteleft}responsible subject{\textquoteright}. Much of the confusion surrounding the issue of the firm's legal personality is due to the tendency to address the matter with only these, all too often conflated, definitions of personhood in mind. On the contrary, when the term {\textquoteleft}person{\textquoteright} is defined in line with its original meaning as {\textquoteleft}mask{\textquoteright} worn in the legal drama, it is easy to see that it is only the capacity to attract legal relations that defines the legal person. This definition, that avoids the undesirable emotional associations and equivocations that often plague the debate, is important for a legally grounded view of the firm",
author = "David Gindis",
note = "This article has been published in a revised form in Journal of Institutional Economics, doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137415000235. This version is free to view and download for private research and study only. Not for re-distribution, re-sale or use in derivative works. {\textcopyright} Millennium Economics Ltd 2015. Published by Cambridge University Press.",
year = "2016",
month = sep,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S1744137415000235",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "499--513",
journal = "Journal of Institutional Economics",
issn = "1744-1374",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Legal Personhood and the Firm: Avoiding Anthropomorphism and Equivocation

AU - Gindis, David

N1 - This article has been published in a revised form in Journal of Institutional Economics, doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137415000235. This version is free to view and download for private research and study only. Not for re-distribution, re-sale or use in derivative works. © Millennium Economics Ltd 2015. Published by Cambridge University Press.

PY - 2016/9/1

Y1 - 2016/9/1

N2 - From the legal point of view, ‘person’ is not co-extensive with ‘human being’. Nor is it synonymous with ‘rational being’ or ‘responsible subject’. Much of the confusion surrounding the issue of the firm's legal personality is due to the tendency to address the matter with only these, all too often conflated, definitions of personhood in mind. On the contrary, when the term ‘person’ is defined in line with its original meaning as ‘mask’ worn in the legal drama, it is easy to see that it is only the capacity to attract legal relations that defines the legal person. This definition, that avoids the undesirable emotional associations and equivocations that often plague the debate, is important for a legally grounded view of the firm

AB - From the legal point of view, ‘person’ is not co-extensive with ‘human being’. Nor is it synonymous with ‘rational being’ or ‘responsible subject’. Much of the confusion surrounding the issue of the firm's legal personality is due to the tendency to address the matter with only these, all too often conflated, definitions of personhood in mind. On the contrary, when the term ‘person’ is defined in line with its original meaning as ‘mask’ worn in the legal drama, it is easy to see that it is only the capacity to attract legal relations that defines the legal person. This definition, that avoids the undesirable emotional associations and equivocations that often plague the debate, is important for a legally grounded view of the firm

U2 - 10.1017/S1744137415000235

DO - 10.1017/S1744137415000235

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 499

EP - 513

JO - Journal of Institutional Economics

JF - Journal of Institutional Economics

SN - 1744-1374

IS - 3

ER -