A Critical Analysis of the UK Company Law Corporate Objective: Purposive, Practical and Possible: Longitudinal Corporate Objective to Remedy the Enlightened Shareholder Value Approach of the Companies Act 2006

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anam M. Ahmed
2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 268-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Clarke

AbstractThe historical evolution of corporate governance is considered, highlighting the different eras of governance, the dominant theoretical and practical paradigms, the reformulation of paradigms and counter paradigms. Two alternative and sharply contrasting theorizations, one collective and collaborative (the work of Berle and Means), the other individualistic and contractual (agency theory and shareholder value) are focused upon. The explanatory potential of Blair and Stout's team production theory is elaborated, and its conception of the complexity of business enterprise, with a mediating hierarch (the board of directors) securing a balance between the interests of different stakeholders. The potential for reform of corporate purpose, corporate governance and directors’ duties is examined with reference to the UK Modern Company Law Review. The impact of the intensification of the financialization of corporations is analysed, with the increased emphasis upon short-termism. The origins of the global financial crisis in shareholder value orientations and the continuing reverberations of the crisis are explored. Finally, the imperative of the advance of sustainable enterprise is argued, and the critical changes necessitated in corporate purpose and directors’ duties.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (23) ◽  
pp. 6734 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Quinn

Traditionally, the purpose of directors’ duties within company law is to ensure that the powers of management given to directors are properly exercised. For instance, instead of using their managerial powers to further their personal interests or for some collateral purpose, directors are under a duty to take decisions which they think will further the company’s interests. In most EU jurisdictions, determining what acting in the company’s interest means is not mandated by law, but is rather left to the subjective business judgement of directors. The discretion allowed by this duty has allowed for, influenced in part by a law and economics approach to company law, the shareholder value norm to become entrenched. This paper argues that the law of directors’ duties should evolve to provide specific guidelines to directors on the question of the corporate objective. It supports existing arguments for a reform of EU company law to include a new duty requiring directors to ensure sustainable value creation. The paper argues that any such duty should be framed objectively and be enforced through public mechanisms rather than a reliance on private actors.


2015 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 300-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip J Wells

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical analysis of the various proposals to regulate executive pay in the UK. Situated within a corporate governance context, it focuses on using shareholder empowerment as a mechanism to formulate a regulatory strategy to quell the continued furore that surrounds the issue. Design/methodology/approach – Using an expansive array of different academic materials, the paper adopts the approach of using critical analysis to provide an original insight into the popular and contentious issue of executive remuneration. Findings – The paper finds that the UK Government’s current proposal to regulate executive remuneration, via the shareholder empowerment device of a binding vote on remuneration, will primarily consist of symbolic rather than practical significance. Social implications – The paper provides important social implications, as it provides a new prospective and insight into the well-covered issue of executive remuneration. Originality/value – The paper draws on a host of traditional and modern academic materials to create a new viewpoint on the issue of remuneration. Moreover, the paper is original insofar that it ties the issue of shareholder empowerment into the conceptual design and formulation of company law and corporate law theory.


Author(s):  
Michael Dougan

Following a national referendum on 23 June 2016, the UK announced its intention to end its decades-long membership of the EU. That decision initiated a process of complex negotiations, governed by Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, with a view to making the arrangements required for an ‘orderly Brexit’. This book explores the UK’s departure from the EU from a legal perspective. As well as analysing the various constitutional principles relevant to ‘EU withdrawal law’, and detailing the main issues and problems arising during the Brexit process itself, the book provides a critical analysis of the final EU–UK Withdrawal Agreement—including dedicated chapters on the future protection of citizens’ rights, the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, and the prospects for future EU–UK relations in fields such as trade and security.


2021 ◽  
pp. 125-194
Author(s):  
Eva Micheler

This chapter describes the role of the directors. The duties of the directors are owed to the company and while the shareholders are the primary indirect beneficiaries of those duties, the law integrates the interests of creditors and also of wider society. The law is primarily focused on ensuring compliance with the Companies Act and the constitution rather than with the enhancement of economic interests. The Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 serves as a mechanism through which the public interest is integrated into company law, while the UK Corporate Governance Code adds a further procedural dimension to the operation of the board of directors. The chapter then looks at how the idea of designing remuneration in a way that guides the directors to act either for the benefit of the shareholder or for the benefit of the company is flawed and has served as a motor justifying increasing rewards without bringing about commensurate increases in performance. It also analyses the duties of the directors to keep accounting records and to produce financial reports.


2002 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Moira Carroll-Mayer ◽  
Ben Fairweather ◽  
Bernd Carsten Stahl

The UK Presidency of the European Union called for an expansive, mandatory policy of surveillance technologies aimed at the reduction of crime and the protection of citizens. Research indicates that the efficacy for this task of the technology, epitomised by CCTV, cannot be taken for granted. This paper asks whether the effects of the technological surveillance environment may be more problematic than currently posited in the literature to the extent that they render more vulnerable and undermine the identities of those they are pledged to safeguard. Much of the literature in surveillance studies debates whether surveillance technology, particularly CCTV, has the effects of crime reduction and prevention attributed to it by proponents. This paper goes one step further and through a process of critical analysis explores the import for individuals subjected to the process of surveillance technologies epitomized by CCTV. In particular the paper addresses the question as it is perceived through the postmodernist agenda. Accordingly in the process of critical analysis the paper considers the effects of transcarceration, the phenetic fix and the technological imperative.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document