A Transaction cost analysis of cross-border insolvency.

The thesis identified transaction cost efficiencies in the application of appropriate governance mechanisms in cross-border insolvency law.

Ensuring balance in corporate governance : parts 2F.1 and 2F.1A of the Corporations Law

Effective corporate governance must balance the competing, and at times conflicting, objectives of efficient endeavour and accountability. The CLERP amendments to the Corporations Law introduced on 13 March 2000 go a long way towards providing this balance. While the business judgement rule was introduced to promote efficient endeavour, Pts 2F.1 and 2F.1A maintain corporate accountability. This article compares Pts 2F.t and 2F.1A of the Corporations Law. It is argued that, although there are procedural and substantive differences between the two parts that need to be understood by practitioners, the importance of the two Parts is that they work together to provide for a much-needed improvement and enhancement of shareholder rights and remedies, thus upholding accountability in corporate governance.

The German corporate governance model in the wake of company law harmonisation in the European Union

In this article the authors deal with several recent developments in the European Union (EU) regarding company law harmonisation. These developments took place at the same time that the German corporate governance model has been refined considerably. The authors conclude that these developments in the EU and Germany respectively will necessarily create tension within the EU as far as corporate governance and company law harmonisation are concerned.

Principles of contemporary corporate governance

Aims at providing a concise presentation of key topics and emerging themes in corporate governance. The text provide both law and business students, as well as practitioners of law and management, with an easy to follow explanation and analysis of key corporate governance principles.

The role of internal audit in corporate governance and management

This research report is based on a study undertaken in Australia, and aims to evaluate the role of internal audit in corporate governance and management. It identifies the accountability structures and objectives of internal audit, considers the nature of internal audit functions and the extent of application of The Institute of Internal Auditors Standards of Professional Practice, reviews the relationships of the chief audit executives (CAEs) and assesses the nature of financial report risks and other issues covered by internal auditors. The research findings include a diversity of accountability structures for CAEs and a range of internal audit activities, with the application of the IIA Standards being in need of improvement. In conclusion, the researchers make recommendations for improvements in practice to be considered by The Institute of Internal Auditors and other regulating and governing bodies.

Corporate liability for workplace deaths and injuries-reflecting on Victoria's laws in the light of the Esso Longford explosion

The purpose of this article is to consider some different legal models for the liability of corporations for the deaths and serious injuries of their employees, with particular emphasis on the law in Victoria.

Two recent developments in Victoria prompt this consideration. First, on 30 July 2001, the Victorian Supreme Court handed down its sentencing decision in the case arising from the explosion on 25 September 1998 at the Longford gas plant operated by Esso Australia Pty Ltd. The decision marked the end of the formal public consideration of a devastating event in Victorian industrial history, which began with the Royal Commission set up on 20 October 1998 to investigate the causes of an explosion in which two workers died and eight others were injured. Second, in early 2002, the Victorian Government failed in its attempt to introduce new criminal offences for corporate employers whose employees are killed or seriously injured at work. In spite of their failure to be passed by the Legislative Council in Victoria, these proposals warrant consideration. They represent a growing trend by policy makers in attempting to address more effectively the question of the liability for deaths and serious injuries of workers to employers who operate through the corporate form.

Removal of company directors in a climate of corporate collapses

The string of high-profile corporate collapses recently has provided a fresh insight into many important topics and issues in Australian corporations law. Notwithstanding this, one topic that continues to receive inadequate attention both in Australia and in foreign jurisdictions is the statutory removal of  directors. In an earlier article published in this journal, one of the present authors contributed towards addressing this lack of commentary on the topic by highlighting a number of peculiarities with the provisions under the then Corporations Law regulating the removal of directors in public and proprietary companies. Since that time, the CLERP amendments to the Corporations Law (now Corporations Act 2001) in 2000 introduced some interesting changes to the provisions dealing with the removal of directors in public and proprietary companies. In this article, the authors provide an explanation and critical analysis of these changes, and consider the recent Western Australian Supreme Court decision of Allied & Mining Process Ltd v Boldbow Pty Ltd [2002] WASC 195, which deals with some of the issues raised by the authors in relation to the CLERP amendments. According to the authors, whilst some of the peculiarities raised in the earlier article no longer exist post-CLERP, the current removal provisions still raise some important questions of interpretation.

Reflections on some recent corporate governance reforms in Germany. A transformation of the German aktienrecht?

Focuses on the German law reform relating to public corporations. Flaws to the German system of corporate governance; Advantages of comparative corporate governance research; Features of the German Corporate Governance Code.

The German two-tier board and the German corporate governance code

This paper deals with some interesting recent corporate governance developments in Germany. The focus is in particular on the German Corporate Governance Code, its parts, layout and how it deals with the various organs of German public corporations. The German Code is quite unique since it applies a Code of Good Practice to a two-tier board system, thus making it necessary to deal with the role and functions and the relationship between the management and the supervisory board. This paper concludes that several changes to the German law relating to public corporations since the middle of the 1990s and the introduction of the German Code will ensure that the two-tier board system will remain the favoured board structure for public corporations in Germany. It is, however, submitted that employee participation at supervisory board level will provide particular political challenges for Germany in the near future.

A Look at Corporate Code of Conduct Legislation

Over recent years, there has been a growing perception among civil society in the developed world that multinational corporations are engaged in socially and environmentally exploitative practices that they would never get away with, or even attempt, in their home countries. Whether right or wrong, that perception and its political and economic ramifications have driven a global movement for more responsible corporate behavior. As part of that global movement, three common law jurisdictions—the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom—have seen legislation introduced to enforce standards of practice for multinational corporations based in those countries in respect of their overseas activities. None of those Bills has yet passed into law, but they are worthy of analysis as attempts to transform hitherto amorphous concepts like 'corporate social responsibility' into concrete legislation. This article compares and critically analyses the three Bills, making recommendations as to how they could be improved, with particular emphasis on the need to forge stronger links between the legislative provisions and international human rights law.

Corporate donations, the best interest of the company and the proper purpose doctrine

Corporate philanthropy is illegitimate spending by powerful corporate elite of someone else’s money; an attempt to bypass democratic allocation of taxes; philanthropy by individuals is laudable, but not by corporations.

Just as I wouldn’t want you to implement your personal judgments by writing checks on my bank account for charities of your choice, I feel it inappropriate to write checks on your corporate ‘bank account’ for the charities of my choice.

Are we speaking the same language? Corporate perceptions of human rights responsibilities

Over the last several years, notions of corporate social responsibility and corporate responsibility for human rights have developed on several fronts, including under international human rights law, through voluntary initiatives and in the discourse and the reporting of the corporations themselves. But are all protagonists on all these fronts speaking the same language? Are these developments truly improving the realisation of human rights?
As one aspect of its three year Australian Research Council project examining the legal human rights responsibilities of multinational corporations, the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law set out to discover the perceptions that multinational corporations have of their own human rights responsibilities, the types of activities undertaken by corporations to fulfill those responsibilities and the appropriate extent, if any, of the imposition of legally binding human rights obligations on corporations.
While not setting out the formal findings of that empirical study, this paper reports on some interesting discoveries as to how corporations see their place in the human rights debate. It notes a divergence among corporations' views of the nature of human rights responsibility - whether an obligation or a benevolence - as well as its content. In considering whether corporations ought to have legally binding human rights obligations, a surprising number of corporations replied in the affirmative, citing reasons such as certainty in dealing with suppliers and instituting a level playing field against rogue operators.
However,  perhaps the most important finding is the different understandings of human rights as they relate to a corporation's operations. Agreement on potential reforms would be meaningless if they were not employed towards a commonly understood end. After examining the various responses of the corporations and the evidence they cited to support their contentions, the paper concludes that the various protagonists of human rights responsibility for corporations may be using the same words, but they are not yet speaking the same language.

German corporate governance in international and European context

The main aim with this book is to provide English speaking readers with a comprehensive overview of the German corporate governance model. The authors introduce the reader to the unique features of the German Business and Enterprise Law. The book deals with the most important company organs, namely the General Meeting, the Management Board and the Supervisory Board. The unique interplay among these organs are also covered and the reader is introduced to the particular dynamics of the German two-tier board structure.Further the authors deal with the dominant role of the "German banks" and new players in the German financial markets, focusing particularly on voting rights of these institutions at companies' general meetings and appointing members to companies' supervisory boards. Accounting is shown as the documentary proof of good corporate governance. The final chapter gives an overview of corporate governance in the European Union, the OECD Principles of Corporate Governance and corporate governance in the US, the UK and Australia.