Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
As the ultimate repository of management authority, the board of directors is spared the often laborious process by which matters are presented to it for its determination. By necessity boards must, and are entitled to, rely on corporate officers and advisers to select, refine, and present crisply for resolution the issues that come before it. The cost of such efficiency is the risk that board meetings become formulaic, board action becomes automatous, and board members fail to learn the alternatives, procedural or substantive, that might be available. This article is intended as a corporate governance primer, identifying the toggles, levers, and switches the board can set, pull, push, in the cab of the corporate crane.
In general, management of a corporation is divided between the board of directors and officers. Officers are directly responsible for a corporation's day-to-day operations, whereas the board's role, generally, is supervisory. Therefore, the board need expressly authorize only those transactions that are material or otherwise outside the corporation's ordinary course of business. Examples of such transactions include issuances of securities, declarations of dividends, bank borrowings, mergers, business acquisitions, appointment of officers and setting their compensation, and authorization of significant contracts, including officer employment contracts and employee benefit plans. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires the audit committee of public companies to have direct responsibility for the outside audit function.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.