Memes & Memories
When I saw the article you can link to above, memories certainly came flooding back. I had no idea what to expect when trying to give a corporate law lecture by inventing/using memes tailored to the purpose. After the fact it certainly felt like a “love it or hate it” event (possibly more the latter). […]
Vivendi/Ubisoft
Interesting evolving takeover and related events, made that much more impactful for some of us since they involve creative content companies. Links below: Vivendi stake in Ubisoft passes 25%, increasing takeover threat: French media company needs to acquire 30% of publisher’s stock before it can offer to buy the company Ubisoft dev fears ‘constraints that […]
Discussion Activity 6.1- Transferring Directorial Powers
S. 137(2)(b) provides that where the powers of the directors are transferred to another person, the directors are then relieved of their rights, powers, etc. to the same extent. Why is this section necessary and worded the way it is? One reason is, clearly, that the section will reduce confusion where the transfer was unclear […]
Warren Buffett on Wells Fargo
We’ve used the travails at Wells Fargo as an example/scapegoat at various times this semester. Below is a link to an absolutely fascinating interview with Warren Buffett that will provide additional perspective and likely trigger deeper thoughts no matter where you stand on the issues raised. An investment (pardon the pun) of less than fifteen […]
Discussion 6.1
Section 137(2) is necessary and worded the way it is in order to protect the interests of the corporation. For instance, if a director transferred his powers to a separate corporation (as it can be any person within or outside the corporation) of which [s]he is a sole shareholder, [s]he may use that corporation to […]
Reconciling R. v. Fitzpatrick’s Fuel Ltd. with Rhone v. The Peter A.B. Widener
At first blush, it certainly seems that the decision in R. v. Fitzpatrick’s Fuel Ltd. is inconsistent with the Rhone v. The Peter A.B. Widener. The court in Fitzpatrick’s Fuel considered the guidelines established in R v McNamara to determine whether the conduct of the employee should be attributable to the company. These were that the conduct was: (a) within the […]
Section 33 – Say what?
Restricted businesses and powers (1) A company must not (a) carry on any business or exercise any power that it is restricted by its memorandum or articles from carrying on or exercising, or (b) exercise any of its powers in a manner inconsistent with those restrictions in its memorandum or articles. (2) No act of a company, including a […]
4.7: General Conclusions Drawn Concerning the Law on Corporate Purpose
As the case readings suggest, the corporate purpose cannot be defined narrowly as only serving the shareholders’ interests. Dodds noted that fiduciary duties are owed to a much larger constituency, including shareholder interests, the interests of corporate employees, and broader social goals. The decisions from the SCC in Peoples and BCE suggest that directors will […]
Blog Activity 5.3 – Section 33
Restricted businesses and powers 33. (1) A company must not (a) carry on any business or exercise any power that it is restricted by its memorandum or articles from carrying on or exercising, or (b) exercise any of its powers in a manner inconsistent with those restrictions in its memorandum or articles. (2) No act of a company, including […]
Problems with Corporate Personhood?
There are problems with corporate personhood only to the extent to which we believe in the existence of separate corporate personhood. That is, do we think a corporate is an entity with its own autonomous aspects (capacities, rights, etc. – the details are irrelevant to this point), or do we think a corporation is a vessel […]
Course Facebook Page
