Penerapan Asas Fiduciary Duty dan Piercing the Corporate Veil Terhadap Tanggungjawab Terbatas Direksi Suatu Perseroan Terbatas di Indonesia dan Amerika
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Board of directors hold a fundamental role when it comes to company’s growth. When managing a company, board of directors must follow certain guidelines. Fiduciary duty is one of the many rules that board of directors must abide to while managing a company. Ordinarily, board of directors have a perk where they do not personally liable for company loss, but when board of directors neglect their fiduciary duty while taking an action on behalf of the company and that action caused the company to suffer loss or harm, then the board of directors are personally liable and must compensate the loss or harm that the company suffers. This happened due to piercing the corporate veil. This research used normative juridical approach and literature study with secondary data. As a conclusion, the final result of this research showed that fiduciary duty that enacted in Indonesia is slightly differs from America, due to Law Number 40 of 2007 Concerning Limited Liability Company, the Indonesian company law adheres semifiduciary duty, while the American adhere full fiduciary duty. Therefore, the regulation regarding piercing the corporate veil in America is more detailed and broader than the ones in Indonesia.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Hak cipta :
Penulis yang mempublikasikan manuskripnya di jurnal ini menyetujui ketentuan berikut:
- Hak cipta pada setiap artikel adalah milik penulis.
- Penulis mengakui bahwa UNES Law Review berhak menjadi yang pertama menerbitkan dengan lisensi Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (Attribution 4.0 International CC BY 4.0) .
- Penulis dapat mengirimkan artikel secara terpisah, mengatur distribusi non-eksklusif manuskrip yang telah diterbitkan dalam jurnal ini ke versi lain (misalnya, dikirim ke repositori institusi penulis, publikasi ke dalam buku, dll.), dengan mengakui bahwa manuskrip telah diterbitkan pertama kali di Jurnal UNES Law Review.
References
Bernard S. Black. (2001). The Principal Fiduciary Duties of Boards of Directors.
Esme Faerber. (2008). All about Stocks: The Easy Way to Get Started, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Johnny Ibrahim. (2006). Teori dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif, Malang: Bayumedia Publishing.
Jonathan Macey and Joshua Mitts. (2014). Finding Order in the Morass: The Three Real Justifications for Piercing the Corporate Veil, 100 Cornell L. Rev. 99.
Lyman P. Q. Johnson dan Mark A. Sides. (2004). The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and Fiduciary Duties, William Mitchell Law Review: Vol. 30: Iss. 4, Article 12.
Munir Fuady. (2008). Hukum Perusahaan Dalam Paradigma Hukum Bisnis: Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, cetakan ke-III, 2008.
M. Yahya Harahap. (20019). Hukum Perseroan Terbatas. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, cetakan ke-VII.
Paul L. Davies. (1997). Gower’s Principles of Modern Company Law, London: Sweet Maxwell.
Phillip Lipton dan Abraham Herzberg. (1992). Understanding Company Law, Brisbane: The Law Book Company Limited.
Ridwan Khairandy. (2009). Perseroan Terbatas: Doktrin Peraturan Perundang-Undangan dan Yurisprudensi, Yogyakarta: Kreasi Total Media.
Soerjono Soekanto. (2007). Pengantar Penelitian Hukum, Jakarta: Penerbit Universitas Indonesia.
Stewart Clegg. (2017). The East India Company: The First Modern Multinational? Multinational Corporations and Organization Theory: Post Millennium Perspectives 2017, 43–67.
Virginijus Bitė, Vilija Mogenytė, dan Salvija Mulevičienė. (2022). Civil Liability of a Company Director in the Vicinity of Insolvency: The Lithuanian Approach. European Business Organization Law Review 23.
Woon Walter C. M. (2016). Woon's Corporations Law. Singapore: LexisNexis.