Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-tdptf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-22T13:12:25.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
This chapter is part of a book that is no longer available to purchase from Cambridge Core

13 - Judicial review of management decisions (the business judgment rule)

from SUBPART A - The management

Andreas Cahn
Affiliation:
Institute for Law and Finance, University of Frankfurt
David C. Donald
Affiliation:
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Get access

Summary

Required reading

  1. D: AktG, §§ 93, 116

  2. UK: CA 2006, secs. 170, 172, 173–174

  3. US: DGCL, §§ 143, 144; Model Act, §§ 8.30–8.31

Judging business judgment

Operation under central management is a core characteristic of the corporation. Management authority is delegated to a board of directors and other executive officers who control the aggregated assets of the corporation because it is expected that full-time, professional managers can operate the company more successfully than can the shareholders. In the course of managing the company, these expert directors make decisions to determine the course of the company's business operations. As discussed in Chapter 12, under the company laws of the UK, Germany and the US, directors must fulfill duties of care, skill and diligence, which, while not identical to those imposed on other fiduciaries like agents and trustees, are quite similar. Take, for example, the Companies Act 2006, which formulates the duty of care as follows:

A director of a company must exercise … the care, skill and diligence that would be exercised by a reasonably diligent person with … the general knowledge, skill and experience that may reasonably be expected of a person carrying out [such] functions … and … the general knowledge, skill and experience that the director has.

In an ordinary negligence action under a standard of this type outside of the corporate context, a court could be expected to hear evidence from an expert witness as to whether the defendant in fact showed the “knowledge, skill and experience” required to meet the objective standard of care plus any special (subjective) skills held.

Type
Chapter
Information
Comparative Company Law
Text and Cases on the Laws Governing Corporations in Germany, the UK and the USA
, pp. 369 - 415
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×