The emerging critiques toward the conception of directors' duties
It has long been established that directors and other officers owe their duties to the company alone. Originated from common law, this rule, although have been strictly applied by the courts in Malaysia to draw the borderline between the interests of a company and its members, it does not mean th...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Conference or Workshop Item |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2016
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://eprints.unisza.edu.my/1007/1/FH03-FUHA-17-08050.pdf http://eprints.unisza.edu.my/1007/ |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | It has long been established that directors and other officers owe their duties to the company
alone. Originated from common law, this rule, although have been strictly applied by the
courts in Malaysia to draw the borderline between the interests of a company and its
members, it does not mean that directors can simply act without taking into account the
interests of members who invested their monies into the company‘s capital. This study aims
to investigate the reasons for the critiques against the rule arise. The methodology used in
this study is an analysis of the literature review, such as books, articles, and court cases
related. The study exposes various views highlighted by the experts commenting on the rule
and its application in law, as well as the needs for the rule to be revisited. |
|---|