The Business Judgment Rule - Finns det en svensk motsvarighet?
(2011) HARK11 20111Department of Business Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- ABL 2005 är i sin nuvarande lydelse en omfattande och i många hänseenden detaljerad lag. Regleringen om skadestånd är dock relativt begränsad genom sitt ursprung i allmänna skadeståndsrättsliga principer. Ett aktiebolag och de spörsmål som hanteras där är unika. Detta kräver därför en skadeståndsreglering som är anpassad efter aktiebolagets karaktäristik. Frågan är om den konventionella culpanormen i ABL ändock har anpassat sig efter aktiebolagets förutsättningar, vilket denna framställning skall utreda. Detta sker genom en undersökning av huruvida det svenska aktiebolagsrättsliga skadeståndet besitter likheter med den motsvarande amerikanska regleringen. I den amerikanska bolagsrätten har man nämligen valt att reglera styrelseledamöters... (More)
- ABL 2005 är i sin nuvarande lydelse en omfattande och i många hänseenden detaljerad lag. Regleringen om skadestånd är dock relativt begränsad genom sitt ursprung i allmänna skadeståndsrättsliga principer. Ett aktiebolag och de spörsmål som hanteras där är unika. Detta kräver därför en skadeståndsreglering som är anpassad efter aktiebolagets karaktäristik. Frågan är om den konventionella culpanormen i ABL ändock har anpassat sig efter aktiebolagets förutsättningar, vilket denna framställning skall utreda. Detta sker genom en undersökning av huruvida det svenska aktiebolagsrättsliga skadeståndet besitter likheter med den motsvarande amerikanska regleringen. I den amerikanska bolagsrätten har man nämligen valt att reglera styrelseledamöters skadeståndsansvar, vilket är utgångspunkten för denna uppsats, med hjälp av presumtivt uppfyllda skyldigheter för ledamöterna vilka avgränsar domstolens culpabedömning.
Genom allmänna skadeståndsrättsliga principer utfaller ansvar för en styrelseledamot vid culpöst handlande. Definitionen av culpöst handlande är dock en komplex definition, som måste anpassas efter varje enskilt bolag. En fri culpabedömning innebär dock att en styrelse kan bli ansvariga för rena affärsbeslut som visat sig förlustbringande genom omständigheter som uppstått ex post. I USA tar man genom the Business Judgment Rule (the BJR) istället utgångspunkt i de förpliktelser som åligger en styrelseledamot. Om en klagande part inte kan bevisa dessa som överträdda, kommer domstolen heller inte utvärdera de kvalitativa aspekterna av det klandrade affärsbeslutet.
Dessa skilda förhållningssätt mellan rättsystemen skall diskuteras närmare i denna uppsats. Först kommer styrelseuppdragets innehåll undersökas närmare, därefter det skadestånd som en styrelseledamot kan åläggas med. Vidare skall det redogöras för the BJR. Genom dess beståndsdelar skall det svenska rättsläget identifieras komparativt. Detta tillvägagångssätt kommer påvisa tydliga indikationer på att en svensk BJR får anses existera i en sammantagen bedömning. (Less) - Abstract
- The Swedish corporation law is an extensive and detailed regulation as it appears in its’ present meaning. However, the regulation regarding damages is relatively limited through its origin in general regulations of damages. The questions raised within a corporation are in many ways unique, and should therefore qualify for a specially customized regulation regarding damages. The question is whether the conventional standard for tortious liability in the corporation law has adapted to the prerequisites of a corporation. This will be investigated through a comparative analyze between the Swedish and the American regulations for corporate liability. The rationale for this is the American approach, where the duties incumbent to corporate... (More)
- The Swedish corporation law is an extensive and detailed regulation as it appears in its’ present meaning. However, the regulation regarding damages is relatively limited through its origin in general regulations of damages. The questions raised within a corporation are in many ways unique, and should therefore qualify for a specially customized regulation regarding damages. The question is whether the conventional standard for tortious liability in the corporation law has adapted to the prerequisites of a corporation. This will be investigated through a comparative analyze between the Swedish and the American regulations for corporate liability. The rationale for this is the American approach, where the duties incumbent to corporate directors is the exclusive basis when determining liability.
Damages for a director normally requires a negligent behavior according to general principles regarding damages. The behavior that qualifies as negligent and the definition thereof is however more complex and must be customized according to every individual corporation. A definition of negligent that is unlimited for the courts to make, could result in director liability for business decisions that was proven unfortunate due to circumstances displayed ex post. The BJR, which dominates the American corporate system, regulates director liability through a reference to the implicit duties of a director. If these duties are not rebutted as violated, the courts will not investigate the blamed business decision further and the directors will not be held liable.
The different methodologies in the legal systems mentioned above will be discussed more extensively in this paper. The relationship between a director and his corporation will initially be discussed. Followed by a presentation of the prerequisites for director damages within a corporation. A closer presentation of the BJR will then follow and the Swedish legal attitude will hopefully be identified through the presented constituents of the BJR. This methodology will further show that a Swedish BJR is likely to exist in a summarized assessment. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/1976818
- author
- Persson, Karl-Henrik LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- HARK11 20111
- year
- 2011
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- ABL, the Business Judgment Rule, styrelse, skadestånd
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 1976818
- date added to LUP
- 2011-06-15 16:43:56
- date last changed
- 2011-06-15 16:43:56
@misc{1976818,
abstract = {{The Swedish corporation law is an extensive and detailed regulation as it appears in its’ present meaning. However, the regulation regarding damages is relatively limited through its origin in general regulations of damages. The questions raised within a corporation are in many ways unique, and should therefore qualify for a specially customized regulation regarding damages. The question is whether the conventional standard for tortious liability in the corporation law has adapted to the prerequisites of a corporation. This will be investigated through a comparative analyze between the Swedish and the American regulations for corporate liability. The rationale for this is the American approach, where the duties incumbent to corporate directors is the exclusive basis when determining liability.
Damages for a director normally requires a negligent behavior according to general principles regarding damages. The behavior that qualifies as negligent and the definition thereof is however more complex and must be customized according to every individual corporation. A definition of negligent that is unlimited for the courts to make, could result in director liability for business decisions that was proven unfortunate due to circumstances displayed ex post. The BJR, which dominates the American corporate system, regulates director liability through a reference to the implicit duties of a director. If these duties are not rebutted as violated, the courts will not investigate the blamed business decision further and the directors will not be held liable.
The different methodologies in the legal systems mentioned above will be discussed more extensively in this paper. The relationship between a director and his corporation will initially be discussed. Followed by a presentation of the prerequisites for director damages within a corporation. A closer presentation of the BJR will then follow and the Swedish legal attitude will hopefully be identified through the presented constituents of the BJR. This methodology will further show that a Swedish BJR is likely to exist in a summarized assessment.}},
author = {{Persson, Karl-Henrik}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{The Business Judgment Rule - Finns det en svensk motsvarighet?}},
year = {{2011}},
}