首页> 外文OA文献 >Enforcing breaches of directors’ duties by a public body and antipodean experiences
【2h】

Enforcing breaches of directors’ duties by a public body and antipodean experiences

机译:强制公共机构违反董事职责和对立经验

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

A number of commentators, as well as government reports, have argued that the UK’s reliance on private enforcement mechanisms for breaches of directors’ duties has generally been ineffective. Some argue that provision should be made in statute for public enforcement. Assuming that there is strength in this argument this article asks what form this public enforcement should take. The article considers the way that Australia has proceeded in the past 20 years or so in permitting the public enforcement of breaches of directors’ duties, via both criminal sanctions and civil penalties. The argument advanced in this article is that despite the possible advantages that may flow from the introduction of a criminal enforcement regime, such a regime is unlikely to be adopted in the UK. Following an examination of the use that the Australian corporate regulator has made of the civil penalty regime the argument advanced in the article is that the introduction in the UK of a similar regime providing for the making of the same kind of orders would be beneficial.
机译:许多评论员以及政府报告都认为,英国依靠私人执法机制来违反董事职责通常是无效的。有人认为应在法规中规定公共执法。假定此论点有力,本文将询问这种公共执法应采取何种形式。文章考虑了澳大利亚在过去20年左右的时间里采取的方式,允许其通过刑事制裁和民事处罚来公开执行违反董事职责的行为。本文提出的论点是,尽管引入刑事执法制度可能会带来潜在的好处,但英国不太可能采用这种制度。在研究了澳大利亚公司监管机构对民事处罚制度的使用后,本文提出的论点是,在英国引入类似的制度以提供同样的命令将是有益的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号