恰当的目的和董事的职责——是时候杀死奇美拉了吗?

IF 1.2 4区 社会学 Q1 LAW Journal of Corporate Law Studies Pub Date : 2022-07-03 DOI:10.1080/14735970.2023.2218770
Pearlie M. C. Koh
{"title":"恰当的目的和董事的职责——是时候杀死奇美拉了吗?","authors":"Pearlie M. C. Koh","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2023.2218770","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The statutory statement of directors' duties contained in the Companies Act 2006 imposes a duty on directors to ‘only exercise powers for the purposes for which they are conferred’. The duty has been equiparated with the equitable fraud on a power doctrine. This paper challenges the correctness of this approach, and argues that the unwarranted ‘merging’ of the duty and the doctrine has resulted in a legal chimera standing in the way of a proper understanding of the roles of each of the duty and the doctrine. It is submitted that this erroneous linking of two entirely different concepts is the result of a failure to (i) separate the different measures that have evolved to control directorial exercise of corporate powers, and (ii) pay due heed to the distinctive nature of the devolution of corporate power.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"1045 - 1073"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Proper purposes and directors’ duties - time to slay the chimera?\",\"authors\":\"Pearlie M. C. Koh\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14735970.2023.2218770\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The statutory statement of directors' duties contained in the Companies Act 2006 imposes a duty on directors to ‘only exercise powers for the purposes for which they are conferred’. The duty has been equiparated with the equitable fraud on a power doctrine. This paper challenges the correctness of this approach, and argues that the unwarranted ‘merging’ of the duty and the doctrine has resulted in a legal chimera standing in the way of a proper understanding of the roles of each of the duty and the doctrine. It is submitted that this erroneous linking of two entirely different concepts is the result of a failure to (i) separate the different measures that have evolved to control directorial exercise of corporate powers, and (ii) pay due heed to the distinctive nature of the devolution of corporate power.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Corporate Law Studies\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"1045 - 1073\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Corporate Law Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2023.2218770\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2023.2218770","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《2006年公司法》中关于董事职责的法定声明规定,董事有义务“仅为其被授予的目的行使权力”。这一义务已与衡平法上的权力欺诈学说等同起来。本文对这种方法的正确性提出了挑战,并认为义务和原则的无根据“合并”导致了一种法律上的嵌合体,阻碍了对义务和原则各自角色的正确理解。有人认为,将两个完全不同的概念错误地联系在一起是未能(i)区分为控制公司权力的董事行使而发展起来的不同措施,以及(ii)适当注意到公司权力下放的独特性质的结果。
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
Proper purposes and directors’ duties - time to slay the chimera?
ABSTRACT The statutory statement of directors' duties contained in the Companies Act 2006 imposes a duty on directors to ‘only exercise powers for the purposes for which they are conferred’. The duty has been equiparated with the equitable fraud on a power doctrine. This paper challenges the correctness of this approach, and argues that the unwarranted ‘merging’ of the duty and the doctrine has resulted in a legal chimera standing in the way of a proper understanding of the roles of each of the duty and the doctrine. It is submitted that this erroneous linking of two entirely different concepts is the result of a failure to (i) separate the different measures that have evolved to control directorial exercise of corporate powers, and (ii) pay due heed to the distinctive nature of the devolution of corporate power.
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
1.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
18
期刊最新文献
The extension of vicarious liability in corporate groups Investor personhood: the case against paternalism and welfarism in corporate law Separate legal personality – an explanation and a defence Directors’ positive duty to act in the interests of the entity: shareholders’ interests bounded by corporate purpose Private credit: a renaissance in corporate finance
×
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