Liability corporate

Black F, Scholes M. The pricing of options and corporate liabilities. J Political Econ 1973 81 637-54. 

California Steel Industries, Inc., located in Fontana, CA, reclaimed wastes to increase profits and address water use issues. The facility, a steel mill, is situated in an area that does not have a ready supply of process water. Also, the offsite recycling facility used to dispose of spent process pickle liquor was soon to become unavailable. As a result of these concerns, the company constructed an onsite recycling facility designed to recover ferrous chloride for resale and to reuse water and hydrogen chloride for use in steel processing operations. Environmental benefits include the recovery and resale of 20 to 25 t/d of ferrous chloride, 13,440 L/d of hydrogen chloride, and 49,200 L/d of water. In addition, corporate liability was minimized because spent liquor was no longer sent to a disposal facility. 

Potential business impacts on customer perceptions/sales Severity of environmental impact consequences Potential corporate liability Cost of collecting data... 

State courts continue to hold insurance firms liable for environmental damages under general corporate liability policies even when policy language specifically denies pollution coverage (Quint 1994). 

Individual versus Corporate Liability Introducing an adulterated product into interstate commerce is a strict liability crime that can be enforced against individuals in positions of sufficient authority and responsibility as well as their company. Persons at risk are those who, at minimum,20 fail to take adequate measures to prevent the cGMP violations. As such, warning letters and other communications are often directed at presidents and CEOs as well as their companies. As stated by the U.S. Supreme Court21 in 1964, just two years after the FDCA as we know it was passed ... 

The legislation holds responsible persons and companies liable for toxic wastes cleanup and restitution costs. Unfortunately, the legislation was not clear on this point and not all federal courts have applied the same standards to determine parent corporation liability for CERCLA infractions. 

The early history of atomic weapons and fallout left a residue of fear and distrust of nuclear technologies. The so-called anti-nuke movement developed from this residue. Civilian nuclear power plants use a controlled nuclear fission reaction to boil water to turn a steam turbine to make electricity. The corporate sector was initially reluctant to finance nuclear power plants when President Eisenhower praised them in 1953. However after Congress enacted the Price-Anderson Act in 1957, to limit corporate liability in case of mishap, development of the technology proceeded apace. The first nuclear power plant built without direct government funding went on-line in late 1959. 

After an extended period of controversy, some corporate liability was admitted and limited compensation was paid to victims of this exposure. Discharge into the bay was stopped, and dredging was commenced to recover mercurials in the sediment at the bottom of the bay. A net was placed across the bay to prevent exodus of contaminated fish. This net was removed in 1997 and fishing was again allowed, since mercury levels in fish were found to be below... 

Managers are discovering also that the intangible indicators that gauge sustainability can also be indicators of efficacy - that is, how well a company is run. From the management of corporate liabilities to new market ventures, a sustainable business strategy can improve all segments of corporate activity (Funk, Section 8.3 also see Section 8.9 business case). 

Reuter, P., The Economic Consequences of Expanded Corporate Liability An Exploratory Study, The Rand Corporation, The Institute for Civil Justice, Santa Monica, CA. N-2807 -ICJ, November 1988. 

For a discussion of theories of corporate liability, see Chapter 14, Penalties and Enforcement. 

Black, F., and M. Scholes. 1973. The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities. Journal of Political Economy 8, May—June, 637—659. 

If you have drivers who are required to hold Class A, B, or C commercial driver s licenses (CDLs), then you need to become quite familiar with these drug and alcohol regulations. Your ability to weed out the bad apples — the relatively small number of drug users and alcohol abusers who inhabit this industry — will make the highways safer and your life easier. Most importantly, at least for the long-term health of your company, it will reduce your personal and corporate liability exposure. 

From a corporate liability perspective, the risks of having a disqualified driver operating one of your vehicles is too great. And while having a written policy is certainly no guarantee that your drivers will abide by it, such a policy, if communicated properly, can afibrd you another layer of liability protection. 

This makes sense not only from a corporate liability standpoint, but also for the personal safety of your drivers. As a matter of company policy, the transporting of any unauthorized passengers needs to be strictly forbidden. 

What can you do with regard to drivers who moonlight and don t record or report those compensated hours From a corporate liability standpoint, how do you control this potentially dangerous situation ... 

By the time the Law Commission started contemplating reform, the old law had actually been used to successfully convict a corporation of manslaughter in the 1994 case of R v OLL Ltd., which established corporate liability following the drowning of four school children on... 

Four particular approaches to the criminalisation of corporations that kill will be identified among the developments that have occurred across different national jurisdictions. The first of these is the introduction of a direct corporate liability homicide offence, of which the UK s corporate manslaughter offence, discussed in the previous chapter, is the most high-profile example. The second is the imposition of corporate criminal liability in general terms, via a mechanism of attribution (such as the identification doctrine) which allows a corporation to be liable for a homicide offence aimed at individual defendants this often creates the possibility of corporate homicide liability but does not lead to the imposition of liability in practice. The third is to have these mechanisms... 

Model one Direct corporate liability for homicide offences... 

The act s manslaughter offence was, when introduced in 2003, the only specific corporate homicide offence anywhere in the world. The possibility of corporate liability for manslaughter had existed in Australian law for some time (see Model Two, below), but this had been done, as in England and Wales, through the attribution of liability to a corporate body via the mens rea of its senior employees. Just as in England and Wales, this test had limited the capacity of the law to hold culpable corporate bodies liable for deaths resulting from... 

There has been a significant shift towards the development of corporate criminal liability in recent years. The notion of corporate homicide has taken hold in a range of national jurisdictions, and the spread of corporate criminal liability as a conceptual tool of supranational market constitution makes it likely that it will spread further in future. But specific offences for this pinpose are a rarity, and although many countries allow corporations to bear criminal responsibility, this does not necessarily extend to offences against the person, such as manslaughter. But the notion of corporate homicide is, at least in theory, a feature of many more national jiuisdictions than was the case 15 or 20 years ago. In identifying this trend, we are led to several important conclusions. Firstly, almost no coimtry eschews corporate liability completely many national jurisdictions have an explicitly criminal system, and others have systems which perform criminal functions but are conceptualised as administrative or quasi-administrative. The practical distinctions between criminal and non-criminal systems are often very fine indeed there are administrative penalties (such as those in operation in Italy)... 

S. Field and N. Jorg (1991) Corporate Liability and Manslaughter Should We Be Going Dutch Criminal Law Review, 156-171. 

Higher regulatory compliance risk, specifically for hazard communication rules Inaccurate, incomplete regulatory reporting Increased corporate liability So, how do most companies fare with respect to chemical inventory accuracy ... 

Once your foundation is firm, you can build on that base knowledge with data that will help you identify and quantify hazards and risk levels by work area, by facility, and for the entire corporation and allow you to reduce risk, costs and corporate liability. 

---