The stakeholder debate and directors' fiduciary duties

It is usually said that a company is a legal entity separate from its management and shareholders and that the business and affairs of a company must be managed by or under the direction of its board. This implies various duties and responsibilities for directors.<br>Directors' duties traditionally include onerous fiduciary duties and obligations of care, skill and diligence in terms of the common law, various statutory provisions in the Companies Act 61 of 1973 requiring certain things of directors or preventing them from doing certain things (see, eg, ss 221-227 and 234-246 of the Act), and possible duties imposed by the articles of association or even separate agreements between directors and their companies.

Socially responsible investment in market downturns : implications for the fiduciary responsibilities of investment fund trustees

This paper investigates whether Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) is more or less sensitive to market downturns than conventional investment, and examines the legal implications for fund managers and trustees. Using a market model methodology, we find that over the past 15 years, the beta risk of SRI, both in Australia and internationally, increased more than that of conventional investment during economic downturns. This implies that companies acting as fund trustees, managed investment schemes and traditional institutional fund managers risk breaching their fiduciary or statutory duties if they go long - or remain long - in SRI funds during market downturns, unless perhaps relevant legislation is reformed. If reform is viewed as desirable, possible reforms could include explicitly overriding the common law to allow all traditional funds to invest in SRI; granting immunity to directors of trustee companies from potential personal liability under sections 197 or 588G et seq of the Corporations Act; allowing companies acting as trustees, managed investment schemes and traditional institutional fund managers and trustees to invest in SRI without triggering a substantial capital gains tax liability through trust resettlement; tax concessions for SRI (eg. introducing a 150% tax deduction or investment allowance for SRI); and allowing SRI sub-funds to obtain “deductible gift recipient” status or the equivalent from relevant taxation authorities. The research is important and original insofar as the assessment of risk in SRIs during market downturns is an area which has hitherto not been subjected to rigorous empirical investigation, despite its serious legal implications.

Overstepping the fiduciary mark

The decision of Justice Boddice in The Public Trustee of Queensland (as Litigation Guardian for ADF) v Ban & Anor is the latest in a series of Supreme Court actions arising out of Ms Ban’s management of the affairs of her long-time elderly friend, ADF. Following on from an earlier decision in which it was determined that Ms Ban held her share of funds in a joint bank account with ADF on trust for him, this most recent case concerned a claim for an account of funds withdrawn from that account on the basis that as trustee Ms Ban owed fiduciary duties to ADF. The purpose of the accounting was to determine whether any withdrawals had been made in breach of trust, which would give rise to equitable remedies. The primary question for determination was therefore whether the withdrawals were applied for the benefit of ADF. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, his Honour found that although some transactions were for ADF’s benefit, substantial withdrawals, (including a significant portion of a $700,000 transfer), were not applied for his benefit, and were therefore made in breach of fiduciary obligation, giving rise to equitable rights and remedies.

The stewardship paradigm : an enquiry into the ethical obligation associated with being in control of resorces

The resource allocation and utilization discourse is dominated by debates about rights particularly individual property rights and ownership. This is due largely to the philosophic foundations provided by Hobbes and Locke and adopted by Bentham. In our community, though, resources come not merely with rights embedded but also obligations. The relevant laws and equitable principles which give shape to our shared rights and obligations with respect to resources take cognizance not merely of the title to the resource (the proprietary right) but the particular context in which the right is exercised. Moral philosophy regarding resource utilisation has from ancient times taken cognizance of obligations but with ascendance of modernity, the agenda of moral philosophy regarding resources, has been dominated, at least since John Locke, by a preoccupation with property rights; the ethical obligations associated with resource management have been largely ignored. The particular social context has also been ignored. Exploring this applied ethical terrain regarding resource utilisation, this thesis: (1) Revisits the justifications for modem property rights (and in that the exclusion of obligations); (2) Identifies major deficiencies in these justifications and reasons for this; (3) Traces the concept of stewardship as understood in classical Greek writing and in the New Testament, and considers its application in the Patristic period and by Medieval and reformist writers, before turning to investigate its influence on legal and equitable concepts through to the current day; 4) Discusses the nature of the stewardship obligation,maps it and offers a schematic for applying the Stewardship Paradigm to problems arising in daily life; and, (5) Discusses the way in which the Stewardship Paradigm may be applied by, and assists in resolving issues arising from within four dominant philosophic world views: (a) Rawls' social contract theory; (b) Utilitarianism as discussed by Peter Singer; (c) Christianity with particular focus on the theology of Douglas Hall; (d) Feminism particularly as expressed in the ethics of care of Carol Gilligan; and, offers some more general comments about stewardship in the context of an ethically plural community.

Should funds invest in socially responsible investments during downturns?

Purpose: This paper investigates whether Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) is less sensitive to market downturns than conventional investments; the legal implications for fund managers and trustees; and possible legislative reforms to allow conventional funds more scope to invest in SRI. ----- ----- Design/methodology/approach: The paper uses the market model to estimate betas over the past 15 years for SRI funds and conventional investment funds during economic downturns, as distinct from during more ‘normal’ (non-recessionary) economic times. ----- ----- Findings: The beta risk of SRI, both in Australia and internationally, increases more than that of conventional investment during economic downturns. Traditional fund managers and trustees in Australia are therefore likely to breach their fiduciary duties if they go long - or remain long - in SRI funds during economic downturns, unless relevant legislation is reformed. ----- ----- Research limitations/implications: The methodology assumes that alpha and beta in the market model are constant. This is the subject of ongoing research. Second, it categorises the state of the market into ‘normal’ economic conditions and downturns using dummy variables. More sophisticated techniques could be used in future research. ----- ----- Practical implications: The current law would prevent conventional funds from investing in SRI. If SRI is viewed as socially desirable, useful legislative reforms could include explicitly overriding the common law to allow conventional funds to invest in SRI; introducing a 150% tax deduction or investment allowance for SRI; and allowing SRI sub-funds to obtain Deductible Gift Recipient status from the Australian Tax Office and other taxation authorities. ----- ----- Originality/value: The accurate assessment of risk in SRIs is an area which, despite its serious legal implications, is yet to be subjected to rigorous empirical investigation. Keywords - SRI, market model, GARCH, trust fund, fiduciary duties, market downturns, Australia.

Investigating the development of the internal and external service tasks of non-executive directors: the case of the Netherlands (1997-2005)

During the last decade, globalisation and liberalisation of financial markets, changing societal expectations and corporate governance scandals have increased the attention for the fiduciary duties of non-executive directors. In this context, recent corporate governance reform initiatives have emphasised the control task and independence of non-executive directors. However, little attention has been paid to their impact on the external and internal service tasks of non-executive directors. Therefore, this paper investigates how the service tasks of non-executive directors have evolved in the Netherlands. Data on corporate governance at the top-100 listed companies in the Netherlands between 1997 and 2005 show that the emphasis on non-executive directors' external service task has shifted to their internal service task, i.e. from non-executive directors acting as boundary spanners to non-executive directors providing advice and counselling to executive directors. This shift in board responsibilities affects non-executive directors' ability to generate network benefits through board relationships and has implications for non-executive directors' functional requirements.

New governance and CSR

New governance (NG) denotes a new approach in the governance strategies. This approach comes with a conceptual background explaining how the hardcore corporate decision-making and people-friendly business strategies have started to converge, relying on executive fiduciary duties, stakeholder engagement, and economic analysis of management incentives. It also addresses how companies incorporate stakeholder-friendly business strategies, examines the role of shareholder and board activism in pushing for social responsibility, and provides quantitative assessments of reporting practices, indexes, and ratings that link governance with responsibility (Kolk 2008; Statman 2005; Deegan 2002). It suggests models for pursuing this emerging frontier through greater involvement on behalf of the board of directors and utilizes a comparative approach to cross the border between the traditional ...

Management renewal? Consequences of the new conception of the “best interests of the corporation” in North American and French Corporate Law

Corporate law integrates a stakeholder conception through the comprehensive meaning of the best interests of the corporation. In this paper, I address criticisms about classical definition of the firm’s purpose. Even if American law is more discreet and uncertain, it is possible to defend a broad conception of the best interests of the corporation. The interests of Canadian and French firms include their partners. While the notion of intérêt social is debatable in France, Canada has recently modified its point of view regarding the purpose of the firm. Indeed, the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada Magasins à rayons Peoples Inc. (Syndic de) v. Wise in 2004 changed the concept of corporate law. With respect to fiduciary duties, the Supreme Court set aside the traditional interpretation of the “best interests of the corporation” which gave primacy to shareholders’ interests. The Court held that the expression “best interests of the corporation” refers to the maximization of the corporation’s value. This innovative vision of the best interest of the corporation introduces stakeholder theory and corporate social responsibility (CSR) into corporate law and provides a new field for the firm’s management to frame their responsibilities. This paper concludes with an extended discussion of the implications of stakeholder and CSR influence for the future of corporate law, economy and financial researches.

Le devoir fiduciaire d'agir dans le meilleur intérêt de la compagnie insolvable: comment concilier les intérêts de l'actionnaire et du créancier?

Le présent mémoire analyse l'impact du contexte d'insolvabilité sur le devoir fiduciaire d'agir dans le meilleur intérêt de la compagnie, devoir imposer aux administrateurs de compagnies par la législation corporative canadienne. L'objectif du mémoire est de déterminer un standard de conduite à être adopté par l'administrateur d'une compagnie insolvable en vue de répondre à ce devoir fiduciaire. Dans un premier temps, comment peut-on définir ce que constitue le « meilleur intérêt de la compagnie» ? L'auteur en vient à la conclusion que l'intérêt de la compagnie est au carrefour d'une communauté d'intérêts lui étant sous-jacents. L'intérêt de la compagnie, bien qu'indépendant de ces intérêts sous-jacents, ne peut s'analyser en faisant abstraction de ces derniers. La jurisprudence et la doctrine récentes laissent entrevoir que l'impact du contexte d'insolvabilité se fait sentir sur la détermination de ces intérêts sous-jacents à celui de la compagnie susceptibles d'être affectés par la finalité poursuivie par la compagnie, finalité axée sur la maximisation des profits à partir des opérations de l'entreprise exploitée par la compagnie. Dans un contexte d'insolvabilité, le créancier, à l'instar de l'actionnaire dans un contexte de solvabilité, supporte le risque commercial résiduel et doit recevoir une attention appropriée par les administrateurs. Par conséquent, dans la détermination de ce que constitue le meilleur intérêt de la compagnie, l'administrateur ne peut, lorsque la compagnie est insolvable, faire abstraction de l'intérêt des créanciers. Ainsi, dans un deuxième temps, qui sont les véritables bénéficiaires du devoir fiduciaire d'agir dans le meilleur intérêt de la compagnie dans un contexte d'insolvabilité? L'auteur en vient à la conclusion que le créancier est un bénéficiaire indirect de ce devoir fiduciaire lorsque la compagnie est insolvable. Tout comme l'actionnaire dans un contexte de solvabilité, le créancier doit être en mesure d'intenter un recours de nature dérivée en vue d'obtenir réparation, pour et au nom de la compagnie. Le contexte d'insolvabilité fait naître, à l'endroit des administrateurs, une obligation de nature fiduciaire de prendre en considération l'intérêt des créanciers tout en permettant à ces derniers d'intenter un tel recours dérivé en vue d'obtenir réparation à la suite d'une violation du devoir fiduciaire d'agir dans le meilleur intérêt de la compagnie. En plus d'être soutenue par une revue de la législation, de la jurisprudence et de la doctrine canadiennes, cette conclusion s'appuie sur une revue de la législation, de la jurisprudence et de la doctrine de certains pays du Commonwealth (Angleterre, Australie et Nouvelle-Zélande) et des États-Unis, juridictions avec lesquelles le Canada entretient des relations privilégiés, historiquement ou économiquement. Finalement, que doit faire l'administrateur d'une compagnie insolvable en vue de répondre à ce devoir fiduciaire d'agir dans le meilleur intérêt de la compagnie? L'auteur arrive à la conclusion que cette obligation de prendre en considération l'intérêt du créancier dans un contexte d'insolvabilité se traduit par un exercice de conciliation entre les intérêts du créancier et ceux des actionnaires. Les paramètres de cet exercice de conciliation sont déterminés en fonction du scénario envisagé par les administrateurs face à la situation d'insolvabilité. Plus le scénario se rapproche d'une liquidation plus ou moins formelle des actifs tangibles et facilement dissociables de la compagnie, moins cet exercice en sera un de conciliation et plus l'intérêt du créancier devra recevoir une attention prépondérante. À l'opposé, plus le scénario en est un de restructuration fondée sur une relance de l'entreprise exploitée par la compagnie insolvable, plus l'intérêt de l'actionnaire devra recevoir une attention particulière.

The stolen generations- Canada and Australia. The legacy of assimilation

Comparison of issues regarding the policy of Australian and Canadian governments of removing aboriginal children from their families and placing them in institutions - some Canadian claimantThis article provides a comparative overview of issues pertaining to the stolen generation in Canada and Australia. It includes a historical overview of the removal and detaining of aboriginal children in Canada and Australia. As a consequence of the revelations of this past practice, litigation has been undertaken by members of the stolen generations in both Canada and Australia. The article includes a summary of the key cases in Canada and Australia. Unlike in Australia, some Canadian aboriginal claimants have successfully brought actions for compensation against the federal Canadian government for the damages stemming from their experiences in the aboriginal residential schools. In the course of this discussion, the various causes of actions relied upon by the plaintiffs are examined While the plaintiffs in these leading Canadian cases were ultimately successful under at least one of their heads of claim, the approaches in these cases in regard to the Crown's liability for breaching fiduciary duties, the duty of care, and non-delegable duties is inconsistent. Thus even in regard to the Canadian jurisprudence key legal issues pertaining to the Crown's liability for the aboriginal residential school experience continues to be unresolved.

An empirical study of the world price of sustainability

The core goal of this study is to empirically investigate whether there is a “world price” of corporate sustainability. This is assessed in the context of standard asset pricing models—in particular, by asking whether a risk premium attaches to a sustainability factor after controlling for the Fama–French factors. Both time-series and cross-sectional tests are formulated and applied. The results show that (1) global Fama–French factors have strong power to explain global equity returns and (2) sustainability investments have no significant impact on global equity returns. The absence of a significant relationship between sustainability and returns implies that large institutional investors are free to implement sustainability mandates without fear of breaching their fiduciary duties from realising negative returns due to incorporating a sustainability investment process.

A indústria de fundos de investimento no Brasil : um estudo teórico e empírico sobre a relação fiduciária entre o administrador-gestor e os respectivos cotistas de fundos de investimentos

De acordo com dados de 07.10.2014 da Associação Brasileira das Entidades dos Mercados Financeiro e de Capitais – ANBIMA, no acumulado em 12 meses, entre aplicações, resgates e captações, a indústria de fundos movimentou mais de 11 bilhões de reais no Brasil. É um volume financeiro considerável, fazendo dos fundos de investimento importantes instrumentos de captação de poupança e de direcionamento de recursos para os mais diversos projetos de financiamento da economia. Além disso, as quebras de determinados conglomerados financeiros no Brasil nos últimos anos envolvendo fundos administrados e geridos por sociedades pertencentes a esses conglomerados colocou em evidência a importância de regras e estudos direcionados à relação entre o administrador-gestor e o cotista de fundos de investimento. De fato, pesquisa conduzida ao longo dos anos de 2013 e 2014 demonstrou que acadêmicos, reguladores e demais participantes do mercado de valores mobiliários possuem poucos estudos que possam assisti-los na solução de problemas relativos a essa relação, inclusive diante de situações envolvendo conflitos de interesses entre administradores-gestores e cotistas. Assim, diante da importância econômica dos fundos de investimento para o Brasil, da relevância dos direitos dos investidores dentro da indústria de fundos, e também em razão da escassez de estudos, este trabalho tem por finalidade realizar investigação teórica e empírica sobre a relação fiduciária entre o administrador, o gestor e os respectivos cotistas dos fundos de investimento. Dessa forma, o objetivo será identificar a origem, as características essenciais dessa relação, os riscos que ela pode trazer para o investidor e os deveres que ela impõe aos administradores e gestores. Para tanto, propõe-se avaliar a origem histórica da relação fiduciária e os fundamentos teóricos que a suportam aplicados aos fundos de investimento nos Estados Unidos e no Brasil. Com base nesse conhecimento teórico e sob o enfoque dos deveres fiduciários aplicáveis aos administradores e gestores, parte-se para a avaliação das normas de conduta contidas nas instruções da Comissão de Valores Mobiliários (CVM), visando testar as características da relação fiduciária diante das regras da CVM. Por fim, realiza-se estudo sobre casos em que administradores e gestores foram condenados por quebra na relação fiduciária e por inobservância de deveres específicos embutidos nas normas de conduta avaliadas anteriormente. Com fundamento nos estudos teóricos e empíricos descritos, conclui-se que existem características essenciais na configuração de uma relação fiduciária entre o administrador-gestor e o cotista de fundos de investimento e que, uma vez formada essa relação, administradores e gestores obrigam-se a observar o cumprimento de deveres de diligência e de lealdade perante o cotista. Igualmente, ainda é possível afirmar que as normas da CVM de fato instituem a relação fiduciária entre o administrador-gestor e o cotista de fundos de investimento, bem como os deveres fiduciários conexos a essa relação.

Securitization and Special Purpose Vehicles in an International Setting: a Systemic View

The present work tries to display a comprehensive and comparative study of the different legal and regulatory problems involved in international securitization transactions. First, an introduction to securitization is provided, with the basic elements of the transaction, followed by the different varieties of it, including dynamic securitization and synthetic securitization structures. Together with this introduction to the intricacies of the structure, a insight into the influence of securitization in the financial and economic crisis of 2007-2009 is provided too; as well as an overview of the process of regulatory competition and cooperation that constitutes the framework for the international aspects of securitization. The next Chapter focuses on the aspects that constitute the foundations of structured finance: the inception of the vehicle, and the transfer of risks associated to the securitized assets, with particular emphasis on the validity of those elements, and how a securitization transaction could be threatened at its root. In this sense, special importance is given to the validity of the trust as an instrument of finance, to the assignment of future receivables or receivables in block, and to the importance of formalities for the validity of corporations, trusts, assignments, etc., and the interaction of such formalities contained in general corporate, trust and assignment law with those contemplated under specific securitization regulations. Then, the next Chapter (III) focuses on creditor protection aspects. As such, we provide some insights on the debate on the capital structure of the firm, and its inadequacy to assess the financial soundness problems inherent to securitization. Then, we proceed to analyze the importance of rules on creditor protection in the context of securitization. The corollary is in the rules in case of insolvency. In this sense, we divide the cases where a party involved in the transaction goes bankrupt, from those where the transaction itself collapses. Finally, we focus on the scenario where a substance over form analysis may compromise some of the elements of the structure (notably the limited liability of the sponsor, and/or the transfer of assets) by means of veil piercing, substantive consolidation, or recharacterization theories. Once these elements have been covered, the next Chapters focus on the regulatory aspects involved in the transaction. Chapter IV is more referred to “market” regulations, i.e. those concerned with information disclosure and other rules (appointment of the indenture trustee, and elaboration of a rating by a rating agency) concerning the offering of asset-backed securities to the public. Chapter V, on the other hand, focuses on “prudential” regulation of the entity entrusted with securitizing assets (the so-called Special Purpose vehicle), and other entities involved in the process. Regarding the SPV, a reference is made to licensing requirements, restriction of activities and governance structures to prevent abuses. Regarding the sponsor of the transaction, a focus is made on provisions on sound originating practices, and the servicing function. Finally, we study accounting and banking regulations, including the Basel I and Basel II Frameworks, which determine the consolidation of the SPV, and the de-recognition of the securitized asset from the originating company’s balance-sheet, as well as the posterior treatment of those assets, in particular by banks. Chapters VI-IX are concerned with liability matters. Chapter VI is an introduction to the different sources of liability. Chapter VII focuses on the liability by the SPV and its management for the information supplied to investors, the management of the asset pool, and the breach of loyalty (or fiduciary) duties. Chapter VIII rather refers to the liability of the originator as a result of such information and statements, but also as a result of inadequate and reckless originating or servicing practices. Chapter IX finally focuses on third parties entrusted with the soundness of the transaction towards the market, the so-called gatekeepers. In this respect, we make special emphasis on the liability of indenture trustees, underwriters and rating agencies. Chapters X and XI focus on the international aspects of securitization. Chapter X contains a conflicts of laws analysis of the different aspects of structured finance. In this respect, a study is made of the laws applicable to the vehicle, to the transfer of risks (either by assignment or by means of derivatives contracts), to liability issues; and a study is also made of the competent jurisdiction (and applicable law) in bankruptcy cases; as well as in cases where a substance-over-form is performed. Then, special attention is also devoted to the role of financial and securities regulations; as well as to their territorial limits, and extraterritoriality problems involved. Chapter XI supplements the prior Chapter, for it analyzes the limits to the States’ exercise of regulatory power by the personal and “market” freedoms included in the US Constitution or the EU Treaties. A reference is also made to the (still insufficient) rules from the WTO Framework, and their significance to the States’ recognition and regulation of securitization transactions.