Corporate Governance: Directors' Duties and Independent Directors
Verified
Added on 2023/06/11
|7
|1170
|267
AI Summary
This article discusses the duties of directors and independent directors in corporate governance. It covers the rules, issues, and applications related to corporate governance. It also provides insights into stakeholder interests and monitoring functions. The article cites relevant cases and legislation to support the discussion.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Running Head:CORPORATE GOVERNANCE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE Name of the Student: Name of the University: Author Note
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
1CORPORATE GOVERNANCE Answer A Issue The issue indentified in this situation is that does directors duties takes into consideration stake holders rather than shareholders? The issue is also to identify that whether companies should have responsibility to the stakeholders Rules The directors while making decision for the organization as a part of their duties are imposed with various obligations and duties under the legal system. These duties primarily mandate the directors to base their actions in the interest of the company as they have a fiduciary relationship with the company. On the other hand the principles of corporate governance are placed in a company whereby the company is asked to take into consideration The due diligence and care duty present a guideline before the directors that their actions should show a reasonable degree of care and diligence. Reasonable signifies what a reasonable person would consider as being appropriate in the situation under section 180(1) of Corporation Act 2001 (Cth). The duty of “good faith”, “best interest” and Proper Purpose” present guidelines before the directors to acts honestly. The term “best interest of the company” does not within its express meaning take into consideration interest of the stakeholders.
2CORPORATE GOVERNANCE In the case of ASIC v Hellicar [2012] HCA 17 it had been stated by the court that the directors of failing to purse profits for the company will fail to comply with section 181. The best interest of the company can be considered as an interest of creditors when the company is bankrupt. Application There are various stakeholders who are involved in a business other than the business itself and its shareholders which include suppliers, investors, consumers and the community as a whole. The provisions of section 181 as discussed above state that the directors have to act in the company’s best interest. The interest does not take into consideration stakeholders expressly. However it has been argued byKeay (2014)that the best interest of the company also means its reputation in the society. Thus even if the provisions of section 181 do not expressly state that the company has to take into consideration interest of the stakeholders there is an implication that the functions of the company must not harm its reputation in the society. Thus to pursue compliance with the section of the legislation the interest of the community may be taken into consideration to maintain the reputation of the company within the society. In addition the interest of the stakeholders such as the public who wants to invest in the company is also protected via provisions such as section 674 and 728 of the CA. This is done by asking the company to make continuous disclosures in relation to a disclosure documents which may affect the opinion of the public for making the investment.The latter section provides that no misstatement should be provided and no omissions can be made in relation to disclosure documents such as a prospectus which may risibly affect the share price. Conclusion
3CORPORATE GOVERNANCE Thus it can be stated that even though indirectly the duties of directors address other stakeholders interest. Answer B Issue Whether independent directors sufficiently perform their monitoring function when they not have time and the comprehensive information of the company business Rule It has been provided through recommendation 2.5 of the ASX corporate governance principles that the chair has to be an independent directors. The same individual should not exercise the role of the chair and the chief executive. Where the chair is independent it may lead to a culture of openness and also provides for constructivechallengewhichenhancesthechancefordiverseviewstobetakeninto consideration by the boards. The relationships which affect the status of being independent includes substantial shareholder, executive employee for the last three years, supplier or customer, employee of professional consultants, contractor, family ties and being a director for the long time The corporate governance principle in the USA allows the CEO and the chair to be the same person.
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
4CORPORATE GOVERNANCE Principle 2.4 provides that the board should in majority be made up of the independent directors. A independent director will be a person present in the board of directors if such person is free from any in position, interest, relationship or association which may influence or may be perceived to influence the capacity of providing an independent decision in relation to the issue before the board and act for the company’s best interest. Application The primary objective for which an independent director is appointed is to supervise the functioning of the board of directors. It has been argued byWatts (2015)that experienced directors are required for the purpose of taking effective functioning of the corporation. An effective independent director is a person who is non executive but is engages, challenging but supportive and independent along with being involved. However there have been may instances where it has been seen that the independent directors have not been successful because of the lack of knowledge which is possessed by them. They are dependent on the information which can only be provided to them by the management. The personal qualities of a person cannot be compelled by a regulation. It has also been provided that independent directors may lack expertise. Thus a board in order to be effective requires a proper mixofnon-independentandindependentdirectorssothatproperexpertise,experience, intelligence and sense of ethics and responsibility may be attained by the board of directors. The incorporation of independent directors challenges conventional wisdom while ensuring that collegiality of the board room is not destroyed. They also ensure thathigh-level decision-making is not dominated by issues arising out of intra-family dynamics.
5CORPORATE GOVERNANCE Therefore it can be stated that even where the independent directors do not havetime and the comprehensive information of the company business independent directors sufficiently perform their monitoring function as they being into the board various other benefits which make the executives directors function in a proper manner. Conclusion Thus it can be concluded that independent directors sufficiently perform their monitoring function even if they do not have the required expertise.