The Inquiry into the James Hardie transactions: whitewashing some very dirty linen The Inquiry is over‚ the heads of agreement are signed and the CEO is appropriately publicly contrite — the matter of the James Hardie Group’s attempt to distance itself from $1.5 billion tort liabilities seems to have been resolved to everyone’s reasonable satisfaction. Should we move on‚ consigning委托 the episode插曲 to the dustbin of understandings of the world’s inevitable moral turpitude不可避免的道德沦丧? If it were
Premium James Hardie
This essay will discuss the corporate fallout and ongoing consequences that arose due to inadequate and misleading communication within the James Hardie Group. It will outline how the company poorly communicated the issue to the public and will also illustrate the importance of effective communication strategies in minimising the impacts that arise from a negative incident. It will also illustrate the importance of communicating clearly‚ transparently‚ ethically and dealing with employees and stakeholders
Premium Cancer Vaccine Vaccination
the political and legal campaign to achieve compensation for victims of asbestos-related illnesses‚ which they developed following a lengthy profession with a corporation called James Hardie Industries Ltd. However‚ all this did come at a very dangerous price‚ a price he did not desire. James Hardie is the CEO of James Hardie Industries Ltd
Premium Ethics Business ethics Morality
Executive Summary James Hardie Industries Ltd. is an industrial building materials company headquartered in the Netherlands‚ specializing in fibre cement products. James Hardie is a leader in the manufacturing and development of technologies‚ materials and manufacturing processes of durable building materials. For over 20 years‚ Hardie has operated one of the largest research and development facilities devoted solely to fiber-cement technology. Hardie ’s fiber cement siding has a wood
Premium
Executive summary: This report serves to analyze the external and internal environment of James Hardie and explain the important of managerial ethics and corporation social responsibility. In James Hardie case‚ since the managers solely pursued profit maximization‚ it neglected employee’s safe and health‚ which result in 137 young worker died due to asbestos-related diseases. Money as the single bottom line is increasingly a thing of past. Pursued profit leads to unethical management‚ propagate
Premium Corporate social responsibility Social responsibility Business ethics
were in breach of their duties when they signed off on the misleading financial statements. In 2007 the ASIC commenced legal proceedings against former directors and officers of James Hardie Industries Limited. In 2001 the company approved a foundation that would be used to compensate victims of asbestos. James Hardie announced that the foundation would have enough funds to cover legitimate claims. The company had taken advice from PricewaterhouseCoopers based on 50 years of claims from victims
Premium Generally Accepted Accounting Principles Corporate governance James Hardie
Piercing the corporate veil describes a legal decision to treat the rights or duties of a corporation as the rights or liabilities of its shareholders or directors. Usually a corporation is treated as a separate legal person‚ which is solely responsible for the debts it incurs and the sole beneficiary of the credit it is owed. Common law countries usually uphold this principle of separate personhood‚ but in exceptional situations may "pierce" or "lift" the corporate veil. A simple example would be
Premium Corporation Legal entities Types of business entity
Introduction: James Hardie group is one of the Australia largest asbestos manufacturers. The group had been liable for 70% of Australian asbestos consumption. However‚ in February 2007‚ ASIC had started to impose civil proceedings against James Hardie‚ the directors and the officers‚ as ASIC alleged that JHIL and both executive and non-executive had breached their statutory duty. This short research report had outlined the role of ASIC and various penalty that ASIC can impose under Corporation
Premium Appeal Corporation Corporate governance
BABCOCK UNIVERSITY‚ ILISAN-REMO‚ OGUN STATE AN ASSIGNMENT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE COURSE: CORPORATE LAW 1 ASSIGNMENT TOPIC: CRITICALLY EXAMINE THE EXTENT TO WHICH A COMPANY IS BOUND TO A PRE-INCORPORATION CONTRACT SUBMITTED BY: EYESAN ORITSEMOLEBI MATRIC NO: 10/0399 SUBMITTED TO: MR. ABANGWU NZERIBE
Premium Common law Contract
BLO 2205 Corporate Law Assignment Semester 1 2013 INTRODUCTION Under the Corporations Act 20011‚ all the directors and officers must be under Common Law duties and Statutory Law duties to exercise their powers in order to carry on one company. It is essential for officers and directors to impose the legal duties for purposes of minimizing wrongful or illegal behaviors’ risks. Briefly‚ the main fiduciary duties and statutory duties contains duty to act in good faith in the interests
Premium Board of directors Executive director Managing director