Research Paper on:
Is ASIC Using Its’ Powers Of Enforcement And Prosecution Effectively Regarding Directors To Adequately Protect Companies And The Public?

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
act on behalf of the shareholders who are the owners of a firm and have a duty, both legally and morally to the firm; but there is also a conflict  of interests present as the directors will also have their own interests to consider which may not be aligned with shareholder interests, as such the way that directors undertake their  duties is subject to scrutiny. There are a number of mechanisms and control in place to undertake this duty. In Australia the main regulatory body charged with protecting investors and  the companies themselves is the Australian Securities and Investment Committee (ASIC), the body has powers of enforcement, but with any regulatory body its presence alone is not always sufficient, there  needs to be consideration of the way that the body uses those powers and whether or not those powers of enforcement and prosecution are being used effectively regarding the directors  in order to adequately protect companies and the public. In order to assess this it in necessary to consider the background and the duties of the directors under Australian  law, looking at the scope of those duties and the ways in which directors duties are regulated. Against this the role of the ASIC can be considered the way it  is using its power compared to the duties and standards that are expected, along with the results in order to assess the impact on the body ands its actions. It  may be argued that according to case law there is a position shift where the shareholders are able to hold directors to account to a greater extent, if this is  found to be correct then the role of the ASIC may not need to be as extensive, but the way that this can be used will impact on the role