{"title":"反乌托邦的附加责任还是我们所知的“垫脚石”的终结?","authors":"R. Langford","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3583169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Australia a mode of liability that has been known as ‘stepping stones’ has attracted extensive debate and criticism, partly due to the corporate regulator’s propensity to employ it in actions against directors. Stepping stones liability has traditionally consisted of two elements – a breach of the law by the company and a breach of duty by the relevant director in allowing or not preventing the breach. However, the very recent judgment of the Full Federal Court in Cassimatis v Australian Securities and Investments Commission confirms that ‘stepping stones’ is really just a straightforward application of the statutory duty of care (or other duty) to the facts of each particular case.","PeriodicalId":309706,"journal":{"name":"CGN: Governance Law & Arrangements by Subject Matter (Topic)","volume":"148 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dystopian Accessorial Liability’ or the End of ‘Stepping Stones’ As We Know It?\",\"authors\":\"R. Langford\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3583169\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In Australia a mode of liability that has been known as ‘stepping stones’ has attracted extensive debate and criticism, partly due to the corporate regulator’s propensity to employ it in actions against directors. Stepping stones liability has traditionally consisted of two elements – a breach of the law by the company and a breach of duty by the relevant director in allowing or not preventing the breach. However, the very recent judgment of the Full Federal Court in Cassimatis v Australian Securities and Investments Commission confirms that ‘stepping stones’ is really just a straightforward application of the statutory duty of care (or other duty) to the facts of each particular case.\",\"PeriodicalId\":309706,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CGN: Governance Law & Arrangements by Subject Matter (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"148 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CGN: Governance Law & Arrangements by Subject Matter (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3583169\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CGN: Governance Law & Arrangements by Subject Matter (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3583169","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dystopian Accessorial Liability’ or the End of ‘Stepping Stones’ As We Know It?
In Australia a mode of liability that has been known as ‘stepping stones’ has attracted extensive debate and criticism, partly due to the corporate regulator’s propensity to employ it in actions against directors. Stepping stones liability has traditionally consisted of two elements – a breach of the law by the company and a breach of duty by the relevant director in allowing or not preventing the breach. However, the very recent judgment of the Full Federal Court in Cassimatis v Australian Securities and Investments Commission confirms that ‘stepping stones’ is really just a straightforward application of the statutory duty of care (or other duty) to the facts of each particular case.