determine what is “foreseeable” or “reasonable” • Ethics‚ Law‚ and CSR o Ethics: study of right and wrong behavior o Business ethics: study of right and wrong behavior in the business world o Moral minimum: the minimum acceptable standard for ethical business behavior‚ normally considered compliance with the law o Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): the idea that corporations should be accountable to society for their actions • 3 Approaches to Ethics o Duty-based: What are the relevant rules?
Free Common law
Responses to recent corporate collapses have overlooked the importance of business ethics in managing risk * Four indicators of business ethics and their risk management aspects are discussed * Investors are wanting companies to disclose how they are managing the risks from poor business ethics practices Over the past decade‚ poor risk management of various kinds‚ for example‚ a lack of board independence or potentially compromised auditors‚ has contributed to sometimes spectacular company
Premium Business ethics Ethics Management
11407294 Harika • 11413431 Burhanuddin Nazami • 11406819 Azaruddin Case study “who killed the electric car?” Is the title of a 2006 documentary film by Chris Paine. CONTENT Introduction Reason(dead of electric car) Problems Recommendation Business ethical points Conclusion Introduction Introduction The first electric car were build around 1832‚ “Who Killed the Electric car?” The film focused on the EV1 model created by General Motors in the 1990s. General motors‚ was one of the largest
Premium Electric vehicle Electric car Chevrolet Volt
submitted to prof. manjula batra | LAW OF TORTS PROJECT | VICARIOUS LIABILITY | | | SUBMITTED BY:VAIBHAV PRATAP SINGHFIRST SEMEMSTER‚ 2012BA.‚ LL.B. (HONS.) | | ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would take this opportunity to thank the people who helped me in making this project which has been a learning experience. In that endeavour‚ first and foremost I would express my gratitude toward my professor of Law of Torts Ms Manjula Batra. Her immense knowledge and teaching skills along with her helping disposition
Premium Tort law Tort Vicarious liability
Contingent liabilities are possible future liabilities that will only become certain on the occurrence of some future events. A contingent liability is less certain than a provision‚ the latter is expected to recognize; however‚ a contingent liability might occur. An entity shall not recognize a contingent liability; nevertheless‚ the company should disclose it‚ as required by paragraph 86‚ unless the possibility of an outflow of resources embodying economic benefits is remote. Where an entity
Premium Balance sheet Debt Insurance
LIABILITIES OF THE DIRECTORS By: Course: Instructor: University‚ City‚ State: Date: LIABILITIES OF THE DIRECTORS A company is usually established by individuals or Directors (officers included) in this case so as to run it in appropriate manner in order to make maximum profits. For this to happen‚ it is for the company (Pandora Diamonds and Gems Pty Ltd in our case) to enter or make contracts with outsiders like Kaplan Bank Ltd and Space Solutions Pty
Premium Corporation Law
Case Study Vicarious Liability Introduction Under the English Common Law‚ Vicarious liability is a principle of the tort laws. The law imposes liability of employees and agents to their employers. Under this law‚ the liability of any tort committed by an employee that falls under the scope of his duties to the employer is transferred to the employer. This includes both the intentional and unintentional torts. The inclusion of the intentional torts came in to effect after the ruling in the case
Premium Management Strategic management Organization
A2 law: tort: Vicarious Liability Question 2-Fairness/Unfairness. Vicarious liability arises when one party is responsible for the tort of another. This situation occurs frequently when an employer is held responsible for the torts committed by an employee. An employer can only be held responsible for the torts of an employee‚ not for an independent contractor. There are also some rules that must be satisfied. First it must be proven that the tortfeaser is an employee. The act the tortfeaser
Premium Employment Tort law Strict liability
Journal of International Management 8 (2002) 223 – 240 Liability of foreignness to competitive advantage: How multinational enterprises cope with the international business environment Deepak Sethi*‚ Stephen Guisinger 1 University of Texas at Dallas‚ P.O. Box 830688‚ Richardson‚ TX 75083-0688‚ USA Abstract An expanded and holistic conceptualization of the liability of foreignness (LOF) is presented that goes beyond the traditional foreign subsidiary – local firm dyad in the host country.
Premium Strategic management Multinational corporation
References: [1] The Google Founders (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3666241.stm) [2] The Story of Sergey Brin (http://www.momentmag.com/Exclusive/2007/2007-02/200702-BrinFeature.html) [3] Google Investor Relations – IPO Letter (http://investor.google.com/ipo_letter.html) [4] Google ’s Code of Conduct Policy (http://investor
Premium Google