scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Principal (commercial law)

About: Principal (commercial law) is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1579 publications have been published within this topic receiving 35379 citations. The topic is also known as: Principal (commercial law).


Papers
More filters
Posted Content
TL;DR: In this article, the authors consider principal-agent contracts when the agent's action generates information not directly verifiable but used by the agent to make a risky decision, and establish a precise sense in which distorting decisions reduces the risk borne by a risk-averse agent and conditions under which implementing an optimal decision rule imposes no substantive restrictions on the contract.
Abstract: This paper analyses principal-agent contracts when the agent`s action generates information not directly verifiable but used by the agent to make a risky decision. It considers a more general formulation than those studied previously, focusing on the impact on the decision made and the contract between principal and agent. It establishes a precise sense in which distorting decisions reduces the risk borne by a risk-averse agent and conditions under which implementing an optimal decision rule imposes no substantive restrictions on the contract. The paper also uses an application to bidding to supply a good or service to illustrate those results and derive additional ones. A risk-neutral agent with limited liability may optimally choose lower, less risky bids or higher, more risky bids, according to which relaxes the limited liability constraint. There are also natural conditions under which optimal contracts are monotone, possibly with flat sections, like stock option rewards.

7 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine the role of the legal advisor within the executive branch and propose a set of principles to guide the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) in order to promote fidelity to the rule of law.
Abstract: Since September 11, 2001 the Bush Administration has engaged in a host of controversial counterterrorism actions that threaten civil liberties and even the physical safety of those targeted: enemy combatant designations, extreme interrogation techniques, extraordinary renditions, secret overseas prisons, and warrantless domestic surveillance. To justify otherwise-unlawful policies, President Bush and his lawyers have espoused an extreme view of expansive presidential power during times of war and national emergency. Debate has raged about the details of desirable external checks on presidential excesses, with emphasis appropriately on the U.S. Congress and the courts. Yet an essential internal source of constraint is often underestimated: legal advisors within the executive branch. On a daily basis, the President must engage in decisionmaking that implicates important questions of constitutionality and legality. Whether to seek congressional authorization before engaging in war, what limits to set (and respect) on interrogations, when to publicly release information regarding security efforts - all are issues over which the President exercises enormous practical control, and all can profoundly affect individual lives and the course of history. This Article examines executive branch legal interpretation: How can internal interpretive process and standards foster or undermine adherence to the rule of law? What norms and procedures should govern executive action? What may be gleaned from recent failures? How might the courts and Congress not only hold presidents accountable for particular failures to uphold the law, but also encourage processes that generally enhance the quality of executive branch legal advice and decisionmaking? This Article takes as its principal example the Bush Administration's interrogation policies. It considers past failures and, looking forward, what standards should govern the faithful execution of the laws. It endorses and builds upon a short statement of Principles to Guide the Office of Legal Counsel, in which nineteen former Office of Legal Counsel lawyers set forth the best of longstanding practices in an effort to promote presidential fidelity to the rule of law.

7 citations

Dissertation
01 Jan 1993
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors consider the problem of the minority shareholder in the private corporation who seeks to recover compensation on behalf of the company where the wrongdoers are in control and thus prevent any action being taken.
Abstract: In this thesis I consider the problem of the minority shareholder in the private corporation who seeks to recover compensation on behalf of the company where the wrongdoers are in control and thus prevent any action being taken. At common law the minority shareholder was severely restricted by the Rule in Foss v. Harbottle. This stated that the company was the proper plaintiff for wrongs done to it and that internal irregularities could be cured by the company in general meeting. From this various exceptions developed to allow the minority shareholder the right to bring a derivative action on behalf of the corporation. The conditions to allow this to happen were, however, extremely restrictive. Accordingly various law reform committees recommended the introduction of statutory remedies to alleviate the problems of the minority shareholder. In Australia, the principal statutory remedy introduced was the oppression remedy, now contained in s.260 of the Corporations Law. This remedy has suffered from a number of defects. The judiciary has given s.260 a more narrow scope than was arguably intended and there are a number of problems with the wording of the section and its interrelationship with other areas of the law. It is therefore apposite to consider the alternatives offered to the minority shareholder in England, Canada and the United States, as well as other common law options available in Australia. These options including the personal action by the minority shareholder to recover on the basis that there has been a breach of the constitution of the company and/or an action in tort. Both Canada and the United States have developed a procedural framework to allow shareholders to bring a derivative action and this appears to provide the member with easier access to the courts than the present Australian options. Finally, I conclude by submitting that the existing avenues; the oppression remedy, the personal action and the tortious remedy do not provide convenient avenues for the minority shareholders to pursue wrongs to the corporation by those in control and that Australia would benefit from the introduction of the statutory derivative action. The law is stated as at 31/8/1992.

7 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors consider the rationale for such an instrument, and the type of subject matter that might be included in a general law on administrative procedure in the European Parliament.
Abstract: The desirability having a general law on administrative procedure has been debated in the past and has now come back on the agenda, in part at least because of support from the Committee on Legal Affairs of the European Parliament If such a law, or something equivalent thereto, is developed there will be a range of issues to address concerning its scope and content This article considers the rationale for such an instrument, and the type of subject matter that might be included The principal focus is however on the logically prior issue as to the competence to enact such an instrument This was questioned in the pre-Lisbon world, and question marks remain post-Lisbon It will be seen moreover that resolution of this question raises interesting and important issues concerning the relationship between legislative and judicial competence within the EU

7 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors consider how agency fiduciary law might be applied to a financial advisor with discretionary trading authority over a client's account, including principal trades and the role of informed consent by the client.
Abstract: This paper considers how agency fiduciary law might be applied to a financial advisor with discretionary trading authority over a client's account. It (i) surveys the agency problem to which the fiduciary obligation is directed; (ii) examines the legal context by considering how the fiduciary obligation undertakes to mitigate this problem; and (iii) examines several potential applications of agency fiduciary law to financial advisors, including principal trades and the role of informed consent by the client, organizing the discussion under the great fiduciary rubrics of loyalty and care. This paper was sponsored by Federated Investors, Inc.

7 citations


Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
20222
202130
202037
201953
201839
201755