Judicial Intervention in Directors’ Decision-Making Process: Section 172 of the Companies Act 2006

Ernest Lim
{"title":"Judicial Intervention in Directors’ Decision-Making Process: Section 172 of the Companies Act 2006","authors":"Ernest Lim","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3103345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Section 172 of the Companies Act 2006 has been criticised for being unfit for purpose in a post-financial crisis world, given that it is very difficult to hold directors liable under this provision. Although courts should not second-guess board decisions, it does not follow that they should be precluded from intervening in boards’ decision-making process through the adoption of a searching standard of review when they assess whether directors have breached s. 172. This article advances and defends a framework — the heightened review — to evaluate board decision-making process under this provision. It is argued that the “heightened review” is beneficial to the company and is supported by case law and policy considerations.","PeriodicalId":114900,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Corporate Governance International (Topic)","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Corporate Governance International (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3103345","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Section 172 of the Companies Act 2006 has been criticised for being unfit for purpose in a post-financial crisis world, given that it is very difficult to hold directors liable under this provision. Although courts should not second-guess board decisions, it does not follow that they should be precluded from intervening in boards’ decision-making process through the adoption of a searching standard of review when they assess whether directors have breached s. 172. This article advances and defends a framework — the heightened review — to evaluate board decision-making process under this provision. It is argued that the “heightened review” is beneficial to the company and is supported by case law and policy considerations.
董事决策过程中的司法干预:2006年公司法第172条
《2006年公司法》第172条被批评为不适合金融危机后的世界,因为根据这一条款很难追究董事的责任。虽然法院不应该事后猜测董事会的决定,但这并不意味着法院在评估董事是否违反第172条时,就不应该通过采用审查的搜索标准来干预董事会的决策过程。本文提出并捍卫了一个框架——强化审查——来评估董事会在这一规定下的决策过程。认为“加强审查”对公司有利,并得到判例法和政策考虑的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信