Bøger af Julia Neumann

Master's Thesis from the year 2010 in the subject Law - Comparative Legal Systems, Comparative Law, grade: A-, University of Auckland (Law Faculty), course: Corporate Governance, language: English, abstract: This paper considers duties and liability of independent non-executive directors as authorities of advice and control in companies. It deals with the question of how non-executive directors should be made liable for mismanagement of the board, but primarily by, and particular failures of their own through breach of duty.Rather than engaging in the debate about non-executive directors¿ function and their efficiency for a business enterprise, the essay takes the latter as a given. Instead, it neutrally provides an outline of non-executive directors agreed functions, preferred skills and favoured qualities. The paper, moreover, details on the different duties deriving from common law principles, equity, and case law. It also considers on statutories and codes as well as contractual provisions providing equivalent regulations on directors¿ duties. This is to draw a complete picture of non-executive directors¿ role in a company and to classify where liability can result from. Furthermore, non-executive directors¿ liability is analysed. The focus, hereby, lies on the determination of directors¿ negligence. The issue is considered as to whether a court applies a different degree of negligence on non-executive directors than on executive directors. In this context, the influence of contractual provisions is contemplated. In addition, liability of non-executive directors is also compared to the liability of supervisory board members. Subsequently, alternative mechanisms of equalizing the risk of liability, such as indemnifications, insurances, and adequate reimbursements, are examined more closely. Concluding on non-executive directors¿ liability, the paper declares the loss of reputation and further ¿soft¿ sanctions as the actual sanction on non-executive directors.

Masterarbeit aus dem Jahr 2010 im Fachbereich Politik - Internationale Politik - Thema: Völkerrecht und Menschenrechte, University of Auckland, Sprache: Deutsch, Abstract: This paper considers duties and liability of independent non-executive directors as authorities of advice and control in companies. It deals with the question of how non-executive directors should be made liable for mismanagement of the board, but primarily by, and particular failures of their own through breach of duty.Rather than engaging in the debate about non-executive directors¿ function and their efficiency for a business enterprise, the essay takes the latter as a given. Instead, it neutrally provides an outline of non-executive directors agreed functions, preferred skills and favoured qualities. The paper, moreover, details on the different duties deriving from common law principles, equity, and case law. It also considers on statutories and codes as well as contractual provisions providing equivalent regulations on directors¿ duties. This is to draw a complete picture of non-executive directors¿ role in a company and to classify where liability can result from. Furthermore, non-executive directors¿ liability is analysed. The focus, hereby, lies on the determination of directors¿ negligence. The issue is considered as to whether a court applies a different degree of negligence on non-executive directors than on executive directors. In this context, the influence of contractual provisions is contemplated. In addition, liability of non-executive directors is also compared to the liability of supervisory board members. Subsequently, alternative mechanisms of equalizing the risk of liability, such as indemnifications, insurances, and adequate reimbursements, are examined more closely. Concluding on non-executive directors¿ liability, the paper declares the loss of reputation and further ¿soft¿ sanctions as the actual sanction on non-executive directors.

Masterarbeit aus dem Jahr 2010 im Fachbereich Jura - Andere Rechtssysteme, Rechtsvergleichung, Note: B, University of Auckland, Sprache: Deutsch, Abstract: This paper deals with the non-use of registered trade marks. It mainly focuses on the trade mark system of New Zealand; however it compares this with selected issues of foreign trade mark systems. Unexpectedly, the non-use of registered trade marks is a topic which closely relates to the vivid field of promotion, competition, and globalization, although it is embedded in the rather static system of registration and administration. The non-use of a registered trade mark enables the opposition to initiate a procedure of revocation from the trade mark register against the respective trade mark. With removal from the trade mark register the trade mark rights of the owner hereby granted cease. Therefore, the application of revocation from the trade mark register in terms of non-use is, beside other grounds for removal, a common tactic of competitors to shed blocking trade marks.This paper shall give an overview of the formal procedure of application, including the legal aspects of the requisite standing, the competent forum and the burden of proof. However, the main focus of this analysis encompasses the legal term and definition of the use (¿genuine use¿) of a trade mark. Unfortunately, New Zealand legislation as well as other Common Law and Civil Law jurisdictions gives minimal guidance on the interpretation of the term ¿genuine use¿. Although, European jurisdiction created and confirmed a common understanding by pointing out some main criteria, this definition only constitutes a framework. Subsequently, the term has been formed through case-by-case decisions of national and overseas courts and the Intellectual Property Office. Therefore, this paper will provide different case examples of the jurisdiction of New Zealand and other jurisdictions. However, the line of cases will show the variety regarding the determination of ¿genuine use¿. A comprehensive and universal definition of the term cannot be established. Actions made in respect of a trade mark can only be evaluated as ¿genuine use¿ in regard to the specific circumstances.