Реферат: Business associations

I)Common Law:

(1)early absolute prohibition against self-dealing renders transactions void or voidable;

(2)permissive self-dealing: dirs and officers may contract with the corp if (a)done in “strictest good faith.”; (b)with full disclosure; and (c)consent of “all concerned.”

[1]--burden of proof is on the dir to establish good faith, honesty & fairness;

[2]--courts weigh self-dealing transactions with “closest scrutiny”

(3)self-dealing prohibition also applies to intercorporate transactions where dirs are common.

ii)Statutory (example) :

(1)quasi-safe harbor approach (Iowa statute)--transaction is not void or voidable because of dirs’ interest, if either:

[1]--interest is disclosed and approval is made without counting the vote of the interested dir.

[2]--interest is disclosed to shs and shs authorize

[3]--transaction is fair and reasonable

(2)Note--dir must still establish that he acted in good faith, honesty, and fairness

2)Domination of subsidiary by parent --courts look at the transaction to see if self-dealing has occurred. Example (Sinclair Oil ):

I)declaration of dividends shared pro rata was NOT self-dealing; BJR applies

ii)contract between parent and sub was self-dealing; apply intrinsic fairness test

3)Manager’s compensation :

I)Ordinary corporations --conflicts are inevitable but all firms need to set compensation. The burden of proof is placed on challengers as a matter of convenience.

ii)Close corporations --the income generated by the firm may be diverted to salaries, so there is an option for self-dealing by the parties in control to take tax-advantaged compensation in the form of salaries (taxed once) as opposed to dividends (taxed twice).

d)Statutory Duties and Liabilities --in addition to general duty of care, federal and state laws also impose certain duties and liabilities, e.g., registration requirements under the Securities Act of 1933, liability for rule 10b-5 violations, liability for illegal dividends. Some statutes also impose criminal liability on corporate managers for unlawful corporate actions.

C.OFFICERS

1.ELECTION --officers are usually elected by the board of dirs. Some statutes permit election of officers by shs.

2.AUTHORITY OF CORPORATE OFFICERS (liability of corp to outsiders)--only authorized officers can bind the corp. Authority may be: actual (expressed in bylaws or by valid board resolution), apparent (corp gives third parties reason to believe authority exists), or power of position (inherent to position). If ratified by the board, even unauthorized acts can bind the corp.

a)Authority of President --the majority rule is that the president has the power to bind the corp in transactions arising in regular course of business.

3.DUTIES OF CORPORATE OFFICERS --the duty of care owed by a officer is similar to that owed by dirs ( and sometimes higher).

D.CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN CORPORATE TRANSACTIONS .

1.DUTY OF LOYALTY --because of their fiduciary relationship with the corp, officers and dirs have the duty to promote the interests of the corp without regard for personal gain.

2.BUSINESS DEALINGS WITH THE CORPORATION --conflict of interest issues arise when a corp transacts business with one of its officers or dirs, or with a company in which an officer or dir is financially interested.

a)Effect of Self-Interest on Right to Participate in Meeting --most statutes permit an “interested” dir to be counted toward quorum, and interested dir’s transactions are NOT automatically voidable by the corp because the interested dir’s vote was necessary for approval.

b)Voidability Because of Director’s Self-Interest --today, such transactions are voidable only if unfair to the corporation. The burden of establishing fairness is on the interested director. Note that a dir’s failure to fully disclose material facts may be per se unfair.