We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results:1-10 of 195

Compliance Enforcement Pressure is Increasing for Directors
  • Epstein Becker Green
  • USA
  • April 28 2017

Both the Department of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services Inspector General have long urged (and in many cases, mandated through


CU LAB: Corporate social responsibility: a new director's duty?
  • Clayton Utz
  • Australia
  • July 29 2016

As we move into the second year of the implementation of Recommendation 7.4 from the ASX Corporate Governance Principles and


Shareholder activism: Update on the status of ‘advisory’ environmental resolutions in Australia
  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • Australia
  • July 21 2016

In its recent decision in Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility v Commonwealth Bank of Australia 2016 FCAFC 80, the Full Court of the


Early cybersecurity derivative actions miss Target
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • July 12 2016

As derivative actions against the principals of corporate targets of cyber attacks are in their infancy in Canada, there is relatively little to


The hidden costs of FCPA-related corporate transparency
  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • USA
  • September 22 2015

Companies that choose to inform shareholders of their Foreign Corrupt Practices Act compliance procedures should be increasingly cautious of the


44 law professors make a case against corporate social responsibility
  • Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
  • USA
  • February 10 2014

I was completely nonplussed when I saw this brief filed by 44 law professors in the appeal now pending before the U.S. Supreme Court in Sebelius v


Board oversight of CSR & the role of the CSR committee
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • March 11 2013

Shareholders increasingly expect boards of directors to exercise greater oversight over the social and environmental impacts of corporate activities


PIRC UK Shareholder Voting Guidelines 2013 issued
  • Hogan Lovells
  • United Kingdom
  • March 5 2013

Pensions Investment Research Consultants (PIRC) published the 17th edition of its UK Shareholder Voting Guidelines which replaces the Spring 2012


PIRC UK Shareholder Voting Guidelines 2013
  • Shepherd and Wedderburn LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • February 26 2013

Pensions Investment Research Consultants (PIRC) has just published the 17th edition of its UK Shareholder Voting Guidelines, replacing the version


Investors release new guide to the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act
  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • USA
  • November 17 2011

In less than two months, on January 1, 2012, the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act will go into effect.