Australian Securities and Investments- MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about theAustralian Securities and Investments. Answer: Introduction The courts are very disinclined towards intruding into the directors decisions and boardroom of a company because of the risk associated with business law activities. However the courts consider the fact that the duties have been performed by the directors without any personal interest and making informed decisions in the best interest of the company. The courts only interfere when they believe that the decisions taken are really unreasonable. In such cases even honest directors may have to face trial with respect to negligence. This notion protects the business judgment rule. However the rule acts as a hindrance towards the duties of care and diligence with respect to directors (Lawyer, Lander and Rogers 2010). It is difficult to interpret the business law judgment rule in Australia and the decision provided in the case of Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Rich (2009) 75 ACSR 1 along with discussion paper of the federal government in relation to directors duties have set a timely reminder for it. A lengthy decision had been provided by Austin J on the 18th November 2009 with respect to civil proceedings of the ASIC against Mark Silbermann and Jodee Rich the directors of One.Tel Ltd. The decision considered the important question in reaction to the application and operation of Section 180(2) of the Corporation Act 2001. It was provided by the judge that the concept that a rational belief must be there on the part of the defendant that a decision is in the best interest of the company is less onerous as compared to the concept of the belief being reasonable. References Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Rich (2009) 75 ACSR 1 Lawyer, Lander and Rogers 2010. BA, LLB (Hons) (Bond). This article further develops a note by the author published in 28 CSLJ 423.