Fatores determinantes da política de distribuição de dividendos: Evidência empírica para as empresas não financeiras da Euronext Lisbon

Dividends and their distribution decisions, being a component of the compensation of investors are a constant financial worry within companies, thus revealing one of the themes highlighted in the context of the financial literature. Study will address the factors determining the dividend policy practiced by companies listed in the Portuguese stock market. The latter will be 47 non-financial companies listed on the Euronext Lisbon during 2009 until 2011. The two samples that have been investigated include the representative of the majority of non-financial companies listed on Euronext Lisbon and the other financial companies members of the PSI 20. The methodology adopted is one of the ordinary least squares regression and the amount of dividends per share distributed was used in determining the dependent variable. In relation to the independent variables, six explanatory factors were chosen. These include profitability, stability of dividend policy, size, growth, risk and investment opportunities. The conclusion suggests that the most important factors to explain the amount of dividends distributed are profitability and stability of dividend policy. There after, growth and risk factors, as well as factors that explain the amount of dividends distributed are also relevant. The remaining variables obtained were insufficient evidence pointing to a significant effect in explaining the dividend policy of Portuguese companies in the sample. The conclusion also states that differences exist in the importance of the explanatory factors to the amount of dividends distributed between the study samples, given the differentiation of dividend policies, followed by companies from each group analyzed.

Anotação, numa perspectiva de Direito Penal Constitucional, de Criminologia e de Política Criminal, de alguns dos aspectos do Acórdão do Tribunal Constitucional (português) n.º 353/2012, de 5 de Julho de 2012 - o problema da legítima defesa de bens jurídicos individuais e bens jurídicos colectivos, bens jurídicos supra-individuais e/ou bens jurídicos comunitários no meio do Estado de Direito e do Estado Social

o Acórdão do Tribunal Constitucional português n.º 353/2012, de 5 de Julho de 2012, ao declarar a respectiva inconstitucionalidade com força obrigatória geral, colocou em evidência a existência de bens jurídicos individuais e bens jurídicos colectivos, bens jurídicos supra-individuais, bens jurídicos comunitários. Bens jurídicos estes que devem e têm que ser tutelados e protegidos. A legítima defesa pode existir quer em relação à agressão actual e ilícita de bens jurídicos individuais, quer em relação à agressão actual e ilícita de bens jurídicos colectivos, bens jurídicos supra-individuais e/ou bens jurídicos comunitários? Parte muito substancial e importante da Doutrina indica que sim. Mas, então, como reagir, no contexto da hipotética legítima defesa, face à eventual agressão actual e ilícita dos bens jurídicos tutelados, agora com valor reforçado, pelo próprio Tribunal Constitucional? E qual o papel do direito constitucional de resistência? Este artigo pretende fornecer um muito breve contributo para a solução das correspondentes questões. A questão dos Direitos Fundamentais, o Desenvolvimento e a modernidade. § the Sentence of the (Portuguese) Constitutional Court n. 353/2012 of July 5, 2012, declaring its generally binding unconstitutionality, has highlighted the existence of individual legal goods and collective legal goods, supra-individual legal goods, community legal goods. These legal goods, that should and must be defended and protected. Legitimate defense can be either relative to the current and illicit aggression to individual legal goods, whether in relation to the current and illicit aggression to collective legal goods, supra-individual legal goods or community legal goods? Very substantial and important part of the Doctrine would appear so. But then how to respond, in the context of hypothetical self-defense, in the face of possible current and illicit aggression of the protected legal goods, now with enhanced value, by the Constitutional Court? And what is the role of the constitutional right of resistance? This article is intended to provide a very brief contribution to the solution of the corresponding questions. The question of Fundamental Rights, Development and modernity.