The Business Judgment Rule ved vurderingen af ledelsens erstatningsansvar for fortsat drift af et kapitalselskab i økonomiske vanskeligheder
Oversat titel
The Business Judgment Rule when assessing Board and Management liability in the event of continued operation of a limited liability company in financial distress
Forfatter
Andersen, Christian
Semester
4. semester
Uddannelse
Udgivelsesår
2022
Afleveret
2022-01-03
Resumé
Specialet undersøger, hvordan danske domstole vurderer bestyrelses og direktionens erstatningsansvar, når et kapitalselskab i økonomiske vanskeligheder fortsætter driften, med særligt fokus på Business Judgment Rule. Med afsæt i selskabsloven og erstatningsrettens grundbetingelser (culpa, tab, kausalitet og adækvans) gennemgås ledelsens opgaver og pligter, herunder pligten til at sikre forsvarligt kapitalberedskab og at indstille driften, hvis fortsættelse er håbløs. Fremstillingen fremhæver, at ansvarsbedømmelsen i sidste ende beror på, om ledelsens beslutninger var forsvarlige i situationen frem for alene på formel pligtopfyldelse. Gennem analyse af retspraksis, bl.a. Højesterets Capinordic-dom, belyses anvendelsen af Business Judgment Rule i dansk ret: Reglen kan beskytte ledelsen, når beslutninger er truffet på et tilstrækkeligt oplyst grundlag, i god tro og i den ærlige overbevisning om at være i selskabets interesse, og vurderingen sker uden bagklogskab. Samtidig viser retspraksis, at danske domstole i nogle tilfælde stiller en relativt streng prøvelse, hvor også selve beslutningen kan underkastes intens kontrol, og åbenbart uforsvarlige dispositioner tilsidesættes. Afhandlingen sætter denne vurdering ind i COVID‑19‑krisens usikkerhed og drøfter, hvordan ledelser kan udøve forretningsmæssigt skøn under sådanne vilkår. Konklusionen er, at Business Judgment Rule har væsentlig betydning for ansvarsbedømmelsen, men ikke i sig selv fritager for ansvar; afgørende er, om ledelsen handlede rimeligt og velinformeret i den foreliggende situation.
This thesis examines how Danish courts assess the liability of boards and executives when a limited liability company in financial distress continues operations, with particular focus on the Business Judgment Rule. Drawing on the Danish Companies Act and the general principles of tort (negligence, loss, causation and foreseeability), it outlines managerial duties, including the duty to ensure adequate capital and to cease operations if continuation is hopeless. The analysis emphasizes that liability ultimately turns on whether management’s decisions were reasonable in the circumstances, rather than on formal compliance alone. By reviewing Danish case law, including the Supreme Court’s Capinordic judgment, the thesis shows that the Business Judgment Rule applies in Denmark: it may shield management where decisions were made on an informed basis, in good faith, and in the honest belief they served the company’s best interests, and where the assessment avoids hindsight. At the same time, Danish courts sometimes apply a relatively strict review that scrutinizes not only the decision basis but the decision itself, and will set aside clearly unreasonable choices. The thesis situates these issues within the uncertainty of the COVID‑19 crisis and discusses how to exercise business judgment under such conditions. It concludes that the Business Judgment Rule significantly influences liability assessments but is not a stand‑alone defense; the decisive question is whether management acted reasonably and on an adequate information base in the situation.
[Dette resumé er genereret med hjælp fra AI direkte fra projektet (PDF)]