Search results
Jan 19, 2012 · Business ethics as self-regulation helps us to distinguish between what exactly we think firms are ethically obliged to do, above and beyond complying with laws, on the one hand; from what it might be nice for them to do, even if they are not obliged to do so, on the other.
- Metrics
We would like to show you a description here but the site...
- Metrics
- U.S.A.
- Spain
- Germany
- Others
- Comparative Summary
Compliance originated in the U.S. circa 1909, which corresponds to the year in which the Federal Supreme Court recognised, for the first time, that companies could be held liable for the criminal acts and omissions of their agents.Footnote 14 Awareness then gradually grew that disputes, penalties, regulatory restrictions and reputational damage cou...
The U.S. model has influenced related developments in many national legal systems, most directly in Spain. The 2010Footnote 26 reform of the Spanish Penal Code (“Código Penal – CP”)Footnote 27 established criminal liability for legal entities (personas jurídicas) and referred to effective measures and programmes to prevent crimes which could be com...
The situation in German law is slightly different from the above two examples. There is no criminal liability for legal entities and thus there can be no criminal immunities or rewards for those that have adopted a compliance programme prior to one or more of their employees committing an offence. However, this situation is about to change. While t...
In many other countries, there has been the same gradual transition from voluntary self-regulation to enforced self-regulation, frequently accompanied by wider margins for regulators to weigh their measures according to the prevailing business culture, if the wider and sectoral legal framework so permits. By way of recent examples the British Moder...
There has been a growing awareness that disputes, regulatory restrictions, penalties and reputational damage could be avoided if companies design and implement compliance programmes.Footnote 67 The adoption of good practices and effective internal control systems is essential for companies to combat their potential to err and engage in illegal acti...
But despite more than 200 years of governance, it seems that questions about the effectiveness self-regulation in the legal profession have not just persisted but intensified, some lawyers say — as courts struggle to aid self-represented litigants and as technology and consulting firms eye the legal services market.
Nov 24, 2014 · “Self-dealing” is a legal concept which is applied to a transaction in which a fiduciary (such as a trustee, general partner, controlling shareholder, director, or officer) derives a personal benefit from a transaction with or involving the entity to which he owes the fiduciary duty.
- 200 Park Avenue New York United States
- sg@sgalaw.com
- (212) 725-1400
The protective shield of corporate status enables businesses to socialize their losses in a way that traditional proprietorships and partnerships are not able to do. Socializing a loss is a means to amortize it or spread it out over society in general, so the owners do not absorb it individually.
Jul 18, 2014 · Statistics and case reports of the Law Society are used to examine the disciplining of lawyers in light of a model which encompasses the benefits of self-regulation (funnel in) and criticism of it (funnel out and funnel away).
People also ask
Is self-regulation effective in the legal profession?
Why have law societies moved away from self-regulation?
Is self-dealing permissible?
Is enforced self-regulation a legal and corporate reality in Germany?
What if a corporate officer engages in a self-dealing transaction?
How does self-regulation work?
Jennifer A Leitch, 2017 95-3 Canadian Bar Review 669, 2017 CanLIIDocs 238
