THE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE
CENTRE FOR CORPORATE LAW AND SECURITIES REGULATION
SEMINAR ON THE COURTS AND CORPORATE LAW
MELBOURNE 31 OCTOBER 1996
AUSTRALIAN CORPORATIONS LAW IN CONTEXT
The Hon Justice Michael Kirby AC CMG
1
It is important to see the developments of Australian
Corporations Law, examined in this seminar, in the
international and national context. Only if this
is done will we understand the large movements which
are occurring and their likely future directions.
So far as the universal developments are concerned,
the following are clearly important:
1. Globalisation: Corporations
today are increasingly affected by the globalisation
of the corporate enterprise and of the capital markets
which supports it. International competitiveness
is a factor of special importance to a relatively
small economy such as Australia's. The Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission has acknowledged
this consideration 2
. Its Chairman has expressed guarded support for
the view that competitiveness in a domestic market
is the key to success in international markets
3 . However
that may be, the real world in which the modern
Australian corporation operates is increasingly
affected by the growth of regional and international
markets which, in the past, tended to involve only
the largest corporations. This means that corporations
today must increasingly operate in a variety of
legal jurisdictions. They are subject to capital
markets typically outside the control of Australian
regulators.
2. Harmonisation: These developments
have inevitably resulted in international pressure
towards the harmonisation of laws and policies affecting
corporations. The World Trade Organisation may,
at some time in the future, adopt a common competition
law. It may even grow into an enforcement agency
4
. The OECD already plays a harmonisation role by
bringing about agreements between countries through
information exchange. The OECD provides a forum
for debate about the principles of competition policy.
It is a force for convergence in the policies (and
hence the laws) of the developed countries which
make up the OECD. According to Professor Fels, it
"sets the actual framework for some aspects
of competition policy around the world"
5 .
3. Institutional investors: One
feature of the international capital market to which
I have referred is the growth of the importance
of institutional investors. Huge funds are now moved
around the world by Fund Managers. Their great power
challenges some of the assumptions upon which corporations
law has developed until now. They will typically
have no particular sense of loyalty to, or involvement
in, the corporation or its officers and staff. Their
concern will typically be to attract the best return
with maximum safety. Their capacity to shift large
funds quickly not only between corporations but
between different countries radically alters some
of the hypotheses about shareholder conduct which
previously existed. The idea of the shareholder
as a small capitalist is still true. But that kind
of shareholder is of less significance today than
in the past. The institutional investor, with international
interests and perspectives, is increasingly important
to the corporation of today.
4. Technology: Economic pressure
and changing technology are resulting in continuing
pressure for the "down-sizing" of employment
in corporations. This is not a new phenomenon. But
it grows apace with international pressure. It is
another factor affecting the human relationships
which exist within corporations and which the law
seeks to reflect and to protect.
5. Governmental corporations:
Throughout the world, there is a fairly consistent
move to privatise former government business corporations.
Critics may suggest the limits which should be imposed
upon the surrender by governments of their "core
functions". But the old notion of government
business enterprises dominating the "commanding
heights" of the economy is now discredited.
The complex question now presented is the extent
to which privatised activity of a governmental character
is, or should still be, rendered subject to remedies
of public law 6
. The answer to this question will typically depend
upon the investment of public funds in the business
of the privatised former government corporation
and the extent to which public officials continue
to play a part in their activities.
Within the Australian scene, there are some additional,
local factors which affect the debates about the
future directions of corporations law. They include:
6. Corporate crime: The sorry
record of the high profile corporate offenders in
the 1980s, which brought such discredit to corporate
activity in Australia is still remembered. The events
of the 1980s, still being unravelled, tend to discourage,
in Australia, the most radical solutions of corporate
law reform and suggestions for the withdrawal of
the regulators from this area of economic activity.
The challenge remains that of retaining the entrepreneurial
spark which is essential to the success of the corporation
in the marketplace but under conditions of corporate
honesty to the general community and fidelity to
shareholders. Whilst the memory of the corporate
offenders is still so vivid in Australia, it is
difficult to argue for significantly increased withdrawal
from the regulation of corporations, at least in
respect of the risks of dishonesty and breach of
trust.
7. The courts: The reports of
the Federal Court of Australia continue to demonstrate
the shift of business in corporate law matters from
the State Supreme Courts to the Federal Court
7 . Some competition
between courts may be good for the corporation consumer.
State Supreme Courts have certainly begun to fight
back to retain, or regain, the corporate law work.
One result of this bifurcation of courts is the
bifurcation of appellate authority. This produces
the risk of disharmonious decisions in the corporate
law area. Such decisions add to the difficulty of
administering already complex legislation which,
in the view of many, is over-detailed and over-technical.
8. Appellate decisions: Even
within the Federal Court, there have been inconsistent
decisions which have led to suggestions for reform
of various kinds 8
. A simple solution would be the adoption of administrative
arrangements within the Federal Court to ensure,
both at first instance but especially on appeal,
that judges with specialised knowledge in corporations
law play a major part in at least substantial cases
involving that law. The High Court has itself made
a contribution to uniform decisions by suggesting
the desirability of uniformity and techniques by
which appellate courts, below the High Court, may
achieve that end 9
. The long-term solution to the problem of inconsistent
appellate decisions may be the establishment of
a national appellate court, under the High Court,
to decide the bulk of appeals in private disputes
which cannot be accepted for hearing in the High
Court.
9. Regional issues: There is
an increasing understanding amongst Australian lawyers
of the importance of the law of trading partners
in our region. In this respect the legal profession
is simply reflecting and following the shifts in
corporate activity directed to the region. The most
recent issue of the Australian Journal of Corporate
Law contains essays on anti-trust law in Thailand
10
; companies and securities legislation in Hong Kong
11
; the new banking law regime in China
12 ; securities
and investment law in China
13 ; economic
reform in Viet Nam 14
; and an analysis of the insolvency law of six Asian
legal systems: China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Malaysia,
Singapore and Taiwan. In some ways the corporations
laws of the countries of the region are undeveloped
and the "economic miracle" of the region
has occurred despite, not because of, law. However,
there are undoubted lessons for Australia to learn
in the region. This is undoubtedly where our economic
future lies 15
.
10. Empirical research: The analyses of
the Asian legal systems in the essays just mentioned
were based upon empirical research supported by
the National Centre for Corporate Law and Policy
Research at the University of Canberra. The Centre
for Corporation Law and Securities Regulation at
the University of Melbourne has likewise emphasised
the necessity of empirical research to understand
the actual operation of corporate law and securities
regulation on the ground. I strongly support that
approach. My decade in the Law Reform Commission
taught me the importance of studying more than the
language of legislation. It is necessary to understand
what actually happens in the boardrooms of our corporations.
That cannot be achieved by confining research to
legal texts or legal practitioners. It is essential
to involve corporate officers, in dialogue with
legal experts, to derive lessons from their experience.
Doubtless they will complain, with some reason,
about complexity. Perhaps they will say that risk-taking
is becoming impossible for fear of legal suits aimed
at distributing losses to bankers, brokers, accountants,
lawyers, indeed anyone in sight. If these are their
complaints, it is important that lawyers and law-makers
should understand them. I would suggest that future
seminars of this kind should include an equal number
of company directors to speak to the lawyers and
the judges, candidly, about how they see our discipline
at work in what, after all, is their domain. The
days of legal self-congratulations have passed.
In the corporate sphere particularly, Australia
finds itself in the harsh world of international
and regional competition. It is essential that lawyers
and law-makers should listen to the voices of the
corporations, and not just to corporate lawyers
and otherswho share our legal culture. I commend
that approach for the future.
| 1 |
Justice of the High Court of Australia.
Formerly Chairman of the Law Reform Commission
and President of the New South Wales Court of
Appeal. |
| 2 |
A Fels, "Competition Policy and Law
Reform: Asia/Pacific" (1996) 6 Aust
J Corp L 143 at 153. |
| 3 |
Ibid, at 153. |
| 4 |
Ibid, at 151. |
| 5 |
Loc cit. |
| 6 |
M Seddon, in Government Contracts- Federal,
State and Local , Federation, Sydney 1995,
noted (1996) 70 ALJ 498. |
| 7 |
Federal Court of Australia, Annual Report
1995. |
| 8 |
GFK Santow and M Leoming, Australia's
Appellate System and Enhancing its Significance
in our Region (1995) 69 ALJ 348. |
| 9 |
Australian Securities CommissionMarlborough
Gold Mines Ltd (1993) 177 CLR 485 at 492.
|
| 10 |
S Supanit, "Anti-Trust Law in Thailand"
(1996) 6 Aust J Corp154. |
| 11 |
Arjunan and Chee, "Companies and Securities
Legislation: Hong Kong" (1996) 6 Aust J
Corp L 161. |
| 12 |
O'Hare, "Regulation of the Securities
Industry: Hong Kong FFC (1996) 6 Aust J Corp
L 178. |
| 13 |
Srivastava, "China's New Banking Law
Regime" (1996) 6 Aust J Corp L 201. |
| 14 |
Xi Qing Gao, "Developments in Securities
and Investment Law: China" (1996) 6 Aust
J Corp L 228.
Lee Dang Doanh, "Economic Reform in
Viet Nam" 91996) 6 Aust J Corp L 289.
R Tomasic et al, "Insolvency Law: Six
Asian Legal Systems" (1996) 6 Aust J
Corp L 248.
|
| 15 |
Cf. R Pritchard (ed), Economic Development,
Foreign Investment and the Law , Kluwer,
1996 noted (1996) 70 ALJ 852. |