可持续董事责任与合理股东

IF 2.1 4区 社会学 Q3 BUSINESS European Business Organization Law Review Pub Date : 2023-11-30 DOI:10.1007/s40804-023-00304-3
Hans Tjio
{"title":"可持续董事责任与合理股东","authors":"Hans Tjio","doi":"10.1007/s40804-023-00304-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper will examine the sustainability of directors’ duties from two perspectives, namely that the duties are stable in their own right and that they cover enough ground for them to help achieve sustainable goals. First, we will examine how directors’ duties to act in a company’s best interest operate well when shareholder interests are aligned. These duties, when breached, can be ratified by shareholders given the traditional understanding that they are the company. This may, in turn, have been associated with the growing acceptance of shareholder primacy over the past 40 years, seen most recently in the UK Supreme Court decision in <i>BTI v Sequana</i> (2022). The Supreme Court, however, also discussed the limitations of shareholder ratification, and its interaction with the rules protecting creditors, particularly as regards capital maintenance. Those rules have, however, been weakened, and private law has had to step in to address the abuse those rules were aimed at. Where the substantive content of directors’ duties is concerned, the focus everywhere is on how to make directors take account of external constraints such as environmental, social and governance (ESG) concerns and corporate purposes that may contradict enhancing shareholder value (as well as existing shareholder protection) as an established paradigm of company law. We will also analyse the difficulties in accommodating the interests of other internal constituents, like creditors (some of whom may have been externalised). This paper will build on earlier suggestions that the proper purpose rule has a part to play in balancing the interests of corporate constituents both <i>inter</i> and <i>intra se</i> and even in considering the position of future shareholders. The test of what is in the best interest of the company may not provide enough balance in this regard, as seen perhaps from the recent failed derivative action sought by some shareholders of Shell against its directors, and directors should take account of the interest of the reasonable shareholder in capturing the gist of what ESG should aim at.</p>","PeriodicalId":45278,"journal":{"name":"European Business Organization Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sustainable Directors’ Duties and Reasonable Shareholders\",\"authors\":\"Hans Tjio\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40804-023-00304-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This paper will examine the sustainability of directors’ duties from two perspectives, namely that the duties are stable in their own right and that they cover enough ground for them to help achieve sustainable goals. First, we will examine how directors’ duties to act in a company’s best interest operate well when shareholder interests are aligned. These duties, when breached, can be ratified by shareholders given the traditional understanding that they are the company. This may, in turn, have been associated with the growing acceptance of shareholder primacy over the past 40 years, seen most recently in the UK Supreme Court decision in <i>BTI v Sequana</i> (2022). The Supreme Court, however, also discussed the limitations of shareholder ratification, and its interaction with the rules protecting creditors, particularly as regards capital maintenance. Those rules have, however, been weakened, and private law has had to step in to address the abuse those rules were aimed at. Where the substantive content of directors’ duties is concerned, the focus everywhere is on how to make directors take account of external constraints such as environmental, social and governance (ESG) concerns and corporate purposes that may contradict enhancing shareholder value (as well as existing shareholder protection) as an established paradigm of company law. We will also analyse the difficulties in accommodating the interests of other internal constituents, like creditors (some of whom may have been externalised). This paper will build on earlier suggestions that the proper purpose rule has a part to play in balancing the interests of corporate constituents both <i>inter</i> and <i>intra se</i> and even in considering the position of future shareholders. The test of what is in the best interest of the company may not provide enough balance in this regard, as seen perhaps from the recent failed derivative action sought by some shareholders of Shell against its directors, and directors should take account of the interest of the reasonable shareholder in capturing the gist of what ESG should aim at.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45278,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Business Organization Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Business Organization Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-023-00304-3\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Business Organization Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-023-00304-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文将从两个角度考察董事职责的可持续性,即董事职责本身是稳定的,以及董事职责所涵盖的范围足以帮助实现可持续目标。首先,我们将研究在股东利益一致的情况下,董事为公司最佳利益行事的责任是如何运作良好的。鉴于股东就是公司的传统理解,这些义务一旦被违反,就可以得到股东的批准。反过来,这可能与过去40年来越来越多的人接受股东至上有关,最近的例子是英国最高法院对BTI诉Sequana(2022)一案的裁决。然而,最高法院也讨论了股东批准的限制及其与保护债权人的规则的相互作用,特别是在维持资本方面。然而,这些规则已经被削弱,私法不得不介入,以解决这些规则所针对的滥用问题。就董事职责的实质内容而言,各方关注的焦点都是如何使董事考虑到外部约束,如环境、社会和治理(ESG)问题和公司目标,这些外部约束可能与作为公司法既定范式的股东价值提升(以及现有股东保护)相矛盾。我们还将分析在照顾债权人(其中一些可能已被外部化)等其他内部组成部分的利益方面存在的困难。本文将以先前的建议为基础,即正当目的规则在平衡公司内部和内部成员的利益方面发挥作用,甚至在考虑未来股东的立场方面发挥作用。在这方面,对公司最佳利益的测试可能无法提供足够的平衡,正如最近壳牌一些股东对其董事提出的衍生诉讼失败所看到的那样,董事应该考虑合理股东的利益,以把握ESG应该瞄准的要点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Sustainable Directors’ Duties and Reasonable Shareholders

This paper will examine the sustainability of directors’ duties from two perspectives, namely that the duties are stable in their own right and that they cover enough ground for them to help achieve sustainable goals. First, we will examine how directors’ duties to act in a company’s best interest operate well when shareholder interests are aligned. These duties, when breached, can be ratified by shareholders given the traditional understanding that they are the company. This may, in turn, have been associated with the growing acceptance of shareholder primacy over the past 40 years, seen most recently in the UK Supreme Court decision in BTI v Sequana (2022). The Supreme Court, however, also discussed the limitations of shareholder ratification, and its interaction with the rules protecting creditors, particularly as regards capital maintenance. Those rules have, however, been weakened, and private law has had to step in to address the abuse those rules were aimed at. Where the substantive content of directors’ duties is concerned, the focus everywhere is on how to make directors take account of external constraints such as environmental, social and governance (ESG) concerns and corporate purposes that may contradict enhancing shareholder value (as well as existing shareholder protection) as an established paradigm of company law. We will also analyse the difficulties in accommodating the interests of other internal constituents, like creditors (some of whom may have been externalised). This paper will build on earlier suggestions that the proper purpose rule has a part to play in balancing the interests of corporate constituents both inter and intra se and even in considering the position of future shareholders. The test of what is in the best interest of the company may not provide enough balance in this regard, as seen perhaps from the recent failed derivative action sought by some shareholders of Shell against its directors, and directors should take account of the interest of the reasonable shareholder in capturing the gist of what ESG should aim at.

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
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
9.50%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: The European Business Organization Law Review (EBOR) aims to promote a scholarly debate which critically analyses the whole range of organizations chosen by companies, groups of companies, and state-owned enterprises to pursue their business activities and offer goods and services all over the European Union. At issue are the enactment of corporate laws, the theory of firm, the theory of capital markets and related legal topics.
期刊最新文献
Enterprise Foundations and Faithful Agency as Drivers of Sustainable Long-Termism in Philanthropy Solving Investors’ Problems with Access to Evidence in Damages Litigation: Suggestions for a Future Issuer Liability Regime ESG & Executive Remuneration in Europe Interpretation of the Scope of International Commercial Arbitration Agreements: A Comparison of Swiss and Turkish Case Law Reining in the Behemoths for the Common Good? An Analysis of State Control of State-Owned Enterprises and the Pathway to Better Governance in China
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1