Directors' liability
Einde inhoudsopgave
Directors' liability (IVOR nr. 101) 2017/3.5.2.1:3.5.2.1 Reliability
Directors' liability (IVOR nr. 101) 2017/3.5.2.1
3.5.2.1 Reliability
Documentgegevens:
mr. drs. N.T. Pham, datum 09-01-2017
- Datum
09-01-2017
- Auteur
mr. drs. N.T. Pham
- JCDI
JCDI:ADS394934:1
- Vakgebied(en)
Ondernemingsrecht / Rechtspersonenrecht
Toon alle voetnoten
Voetnoten
Voetnoten
E.g. Staleman v. Van de Ven (1997): Panmo I and Panmo II (2001); Schwandt v. Berghuizer Papierfabriek (2002); Ontvanger v. Roelofsen (2006); Blue Tomato (2007); Willemsen Beheer v. NOM (2008); Kloosterbrink v. Eurocommerce (2009).
Deze functie is alleen te gebruiken als je bent ingelogd.
Several statistical strategies and tests have been applied to ensure the quality of the regression model obtained in Table 7. I have discussed these issues at length in the statistical analysis plan (paragraph 3.3.4). Considerations concerning the reliability of the model should take the following into account. First, courts may also implicitly include legal or non-legal facts in their assessment that are not referred to in the text of a decision and are therefore not considered in this research. Second, the sample itself may have contributed to the high predictive value of the model. I used only cases involving a judgment about a director’s personal liability. Moreover, only legal case factors were the object of statistical analysis. Furthermore, the cases selected for this study were rendered between 2003 and 2013, during which time case law underwent considerable development by means of influential land mark cases. The outcome of the selected cases had the added benefit of having being influenced by several of these land mark cases.1 Finally, most directors’ liability cases may be unproblematic or quite simple, allowing judges to produce ‘automated’ decisions.