董事决策过程中的司法干预:2006年公司法第172条

Ernest Lim
{"title":"董事决策过程中的司法干预:2006年公司法第172条","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

《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。
Judicial Intervention in Directors’ Decision-Making Process: Section 172 of the Companies Act 2006
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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