The Abstract Void in Practice: Has the Statutory Business Judgment Rule Changed the Acoustic Separationn Between Conduct and Decision Rules for Directorss Duty of Care?

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergio Alberto Gramitto Ricci ◽  
Jake Miyairi
Keyword(s):  
Decision Rules ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Business Judgment Rule

scholarly journals AN ANALYSIS OF THE DIRECTORS’ DECISION-MAKING FUNCTION THROUGH THE LENS OF THE BUSINESS-JUDGMENT RULE

Obiter ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan-Louis van Tonder
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
The State ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
Managerial Authority ◽  
Court Interpreting ◽  
Legislative Framework

The main purpose of this article is to examine the standard of conduct required from a director in the exercise of his decision-making function, through the lens of the business-judgment rule. The business-judgment rule provides the circumstances in which the duty to act in the best interests of the company and the duty of care, skill and diligence will be satisfied by a director. In order to achieve the stated goal the board’s statutory managerial authority, the standard of director’s conduct required to discharge the duty of care, skill and diligence as provided for in section 76(3)(c), and the features and functions of the business-judgment rule will also be examined. Section 5(2) of the Act provides that, to the extent appropriate, a court interpreting or applying the provisions of the Act may consider foreign-company law. This is complementary to section 5(1) which directs that the Act must be interpreted and applied in a manner that gives effect to the purpose of section 7. The article will refer to the highly developed corporate law in the State of Delaware to assist the research in examining the content and meaning of the decision-making function as a standard of director’s conduct. For this reason, the corporate legislative framework of the State of Delaware will also be discussed.

An Examination of the Relevance of the Codification and Application of the American Business Judgment Rule to Nigerian Corporate Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-397
Author(s):  
Wiseman Ubochioma
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
American Business ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Business Decisions ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
Statutory Duty ◽  
The Us

AbstractThe business judgment rule is an ancient doctrine that was developed in the US. It seeks to prevent courts from reviewing directors’ decisions, on the basis that directors have the capacity and expertise to make business decisions. This article examines the desirability of applying the US business judgment rule in Nigeria. Through a comparative analysis, it argues that the peculiarities of Nigeria's corporate law and environment do not justify the application of the rule. More specifically, it contends that differences in the legal regime for derivative suits, standards of duty of care and skill, corporate law culture, and the distinct epoch in which the business judgment rule and the duty of care and skill were recognized in the US, make its application unnecessary in Nigeria. It concludes that the current statutory duty of care and skill should be retained to hold directors accountable for reckless business decisions.

scholarly journals BUSINESS JUDGEMENT RULE: KETENTUAN DAN PELAKSANAANNYA OLEH PENGADILAN DI INGGRIS, KANADA DAN INDONESIA

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 275
Author(s):  
Yafet Yosafet Wilben Rissy
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Fiduciary Duties ◽  
Business Decisions ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
The Uk

AbstractThis article discusses the provisions of business judgment rule (BJR) in the company law and the application of BJR by the courts in the United Kingdom (UK), Canada and Indonesia. In the UK and Canada, the courts have been long examined the appropriateness of directors’ business decisions. Later, BJR was codified into the Canadian Business Corporations Act 2019, meanwhile, duty of care and fiduciary duties were codified into the UK 2006 Companies Law which implicitly regulates BJR. Indonesia adopts BJR in the Company Act 2007 but the courts rarely examine directors’ business decisions and the adoption needs to be rearranged systematically.IntisariArtikel ini membahas bagaimana dan kapan pengadilan menguji aturan penilaian bisnis (APS) dan bagaimana APS diatur dalam hukum perusahaan di Inggris Raya, Kanada, dan Indonesia. Pada pengadilan Inggris dan Kanada yang menganut tradisi hukum kebiasaan, APS telah lama diterapkan untuk menilai keputusan bisnis direktur. Baru-baru ini, APS dikodifikasikan ke dalam Undang-Undang Perusahaan Bisnis 2019. Sementara itu, tugas direktur untuk peduli dan tugas fidusia juga dikodifikasikan ke dalam Undang-Undang Perusahaan Inggris 2006 yang secara implisit mengatur APS. Indonesia juga mengadopsi APS dalam Undang-Undang PT 2007 tetapi pengadilan jarang menguji keputusan bisnis direktur dan adopsi ini perlu diatur ulang secara lebih sistematis.

scholarly journals Business Judgment Rule and Fairness Standards in the West: A Theoretical Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 556-565
Author(s):  
Irfan Iryadi ◽  
Teuku Syahrul Ansari ◽  
Iskandar Zulkarnain ◽  
Ti Aisyah
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
The West ◽  
Information Transparency ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
American Law ◽  
Rule Analysis ◽  
Research Standards

The application of the Business Judgment Rule (BJR) in the United States has also been increasingly tightened by the necessity of carrying out the duties and authority of directors based on the principle of prudence and efforts to fulfill proper information (transparency and fully disclosure) before the directors take action or decision. In a number of countries, the Business Judgment Rule (BJR) doctrine has been used quite extensively in their legal systems. One of them is in the United States. Basically there are two concepts applying the provisions applied by the American Law Institute (ALI). Second, the provisions that took place in the Delaware court. These provisions have been adopted by several courts. Overall, the Business Judgment Rule and fairness standard are separate research standards used by the court, and one does not feel confused with one another. The Business Judgment Rule analysis does not include a fair analysis, because the duty of care does not require unauthorized transactions to be the object of court examination concerned with fairness standards, only the director acts in good faith, with caution with an information base for that interest , and it does not violate wisdom.

scholarly journals KETENTUAN DAN PELAKSANAAN BUSINESS JUDGEMENT RULE DI AMERIKA, AUSTRALIA DAN INDONESIA

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-171
Author(s):  
Yafet Yosafet Wilben Rissy
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Business Judgment Rule

Tujuan studi ini ialah membahas ketentuan dan penerapan business judgment rule (BJR) di Amerika Serikat (AS), Australia dan Indonesia dimana secara khusus menganalisis bagaimana dan kapan pengadilan memeriksa BJR dan bagaimana BJR diatur dalam hukum perusahaan. Studi ini menunjukan bahwa di AS dan Australia elemen BJR telah menjadi sebuah statutory obligation. Keputusan bisnis direktur telah diadili pengadilan dalam tradisi common law dan kini diatur secara tegas bahwa keputusan bisnis bisa diadili jika terdapat pelanggaran duty of care dan tugas fidusia direktur. Indonesia juga mengadopsi BJR dalam Undang-Undang Perseroan Terbatas 2007 namun pengadilan jarang menguji BJR. Terkait adopsi BJR, studi ini mengindikasikan bahwa adopsi tersebut masih menyisakan sejumlah persoalan mendasar. Oleh karena itu, direkomendasikan agar pengaturan BJR perlu dilakukan secara lebih sistematis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document