Skip to main content

Corporate Governance

 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Corporate Governance is the art of directing and controlling the organization by balancing the needs of the various stakeholders. This often involves resolving conflicts of interest between the various stakeholders and ensuring that the organization is managed well meaning that the processes, procedures and policies are implemented according to the principles of transparency and accountability. One of the main principles of Corporate Governance is Accountability. There is no established method or procedure to ascertain the accountability. But, the accountability of a company means the credibility of a company. Accountability refers to a situation where an individual or company is responsible for the outcomes of a particular activity. Accountability on checks and balances guarantees the integrity of capital market investment activities. Agencies with structured accountability can realize legitimacy and a high level of governance, as well as better financial positioning.

Broad consensus exists in the company law oriented literature about good corporate governance. In order to present a comprehensive analysis on good governance, the author has attempted to synthesize findings from various articles, journals, scams and research articles.

The purpose of this project is to present a systematic review of the available evidence-based literature concerning good corporate governance. This project deals with the importance of corporate governance for a company, its principles most importantly the principle of accountability, legislations relating to corporate governance, the need for regulations on corporate governance and various cases where corporate governance has failed, etc.

It is hoped that this project will inform the students, researchers and all its readers about the good corporate governance and its principle of accountability, which are essential for the proper functioning of a company.

All committees on corporate governance constituted in India had the same restricted meaning of triangular relational as the corporate governance. Shareholders, directors and management were the three players in the corporate governance to govern the affairs within legal and ethical standards. The first committee on corporate governance in India was Kumar Mangalam Committee. Most of the committees however defined ‘corporate governance’ having its essential parts as follows: (i) distribution of power so that management would be separated out of governance factors/Responsibility, (ii) accountability of the management, (iii) transparency in all actions.

The concept of corporate governance was widely discussed due to the emergence and the appointment of the Sachhar Committee in 1978. This committee emphasized upon adequate disclosure requirements on the part of companies. The committee emphasized so because it felt that openness in corporate affairs is of prime significance in order to secure responsible behavior.

This committee advised that each and every company should prepare a social report along with the director's report. The committee recommended that these reports must be prepared with the object of stipulating and quantifying different activities pertaining to the social responsibility of the company which was carried out in the previous year. The Companies Act, 2013 incorporates a number of provisions in order to promote adequate corporate governance.

A pivotal part of Corporate Governance is the need to impose governance regulations through stock exchanges, supervisory authorities etc. Now, there are a few reasons as to why such regulations need to be imposed. Legally mandated rules are required to check excessive interference. Over-regulation of corporate bodies may lead to disruption of the functioning of such organizations and it will run counter to the principle of corporate governance. Another pertinent reason is that the owner and founder of the company may invoke inefficient rules owing to his inability to address the issues of the shareholders of the company. Such a situation calls for mandatory rules. In the absence of the aforementioned regulations, the stakeholders in the company, be it the shareholders or the owners, will be at a peril to incur losses. The need for regulations to ensure better corporate governance was felt strongly in the wake of numerous corporate scandals all over the world. Scams like Enron and WorldCom eroded the shareholders’ trust in the entire corporate sector and affected the overall economy as well. India's markets are also weakly informative. Regulations will also check the management's attempts to alter rules to their own advantage which usually happens when the shareholding is dispersed widely in a company.


Corporate Governance by Velanati Jyothirmai @ Lex Cliq
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more