1. W.S. Gilbert and A. Sullivan, Utopia Ltd (1893).
2. Recent contributions include J. Armour, ‘Share Capital and Creditor Protection: Efficient Rules for a Modern Company Law?’, 63 MLR (2000) p. 355; L. Enriques and J. Macey, ‘Creditors Versus Capital Formation: The Case against the European Legal Capital Rules’, 86 Cornell LR (2001) p. 1165; P.O. Mülbert and M. Birke, ‘Legal Capital-Is There a Case against the European Legal Capital Rules?’, 3 EBOR (2002) p. 696; J. Rickford, ed., ‘Reforming Capital: Report of the Interdisciplinary Group on Capital Maintenance’, 15 EBLR (2004) p. 919; W. Schön, ‘The Future of Legal Capital’, 5 EBOR (2004) p. 429; E. Ferran, The Place for Creditor Protection on the Agenda for Modernisation of Company Law in the European Union, ECGI Law Working Paper No. 51 (2005).
3. For example, in most US States, legal capital rules have either been abolished outright or simply withered into marcesence: see, e.g., B. Manning, Legal Capital, 2nd edn. (Mineola, NY, Foundation Press 1982). In the United Kingdom, pending reforms will considerably relax the application of legal capital rules to private companies: see infra, text to nn. 17-19.
4. Second Council Directive 77/91/EEC of 13 December 1976, OJ 1977 L 26/1 (formation of public companies and maintenance and alteration of capital).
5. ECJ, Case C-212/97 Centros Ltd v. Erhvervs-og Selskabssyrelsen [1999] ECR I-1459, [2000] Ch 446; ECJ, Case C-208/00 Überseering BV v. Nordic Construction Company Baumanagement GmbH (.NCC) [2002] ECR I-9919; ECJ, Case C-167/01 Kamervan Koophandel en Fabrieken voor Amsterdam v. Inspire Art Ltd [2003] ECR I-10155.