ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate Governance Blogs -> The Race to the Bottom

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Corporate Governance

: The Race to the Bottom

Executive Compensation, Disney and Delaware Law (Part 5)

By J. Robert Brown

ADVERTISEMENTS

So what is the bottom line on executive compensation?  Delaware courts will uphold executive compensation as long as it is approved by independent directors.  In so doing, Delaware courts will not examine the terms of the compensation, only the process used to approve it.  This procedural approach has a great deal to offer, at least in theory.  It allows courts to stay out of the decision making process by deferring to boards that engage in the proper process.  The theory and practice, however, diverge.  For the approach to work, the directors making the decision must really be independent. 

The Delaware courts do not ensure that this is the case, something illustrated by the Disney litigation.  That case never should have been a duty of care case.  Michael Eisner, because of his close relationship to Michael Ovitz, had an interest in the contract.  By any reasonable standard, he controlled the board of directors (the reasoning of the Chancery Court notwithstanding).  In other words, the approval process was tainted by interested influence.  Had the court examined the case in this manner, it would have imposed on the board the burden of showing that the compensation was fair.  Instead, the fairness of the contract to Ovitz was never at issue much less resolved.  By treating the matter under the duty of care, the court conducted essentially a process review and, unsurprisingly, found the process adequate.

Giving deference to executive compensation decisions by non-independent directors produces what one might expect, an explosion in executive compensation.  It is a charade, with the Delaware courts complicit in the approach.  Say on pay is a reflection of frustration over this approach and the growing sentiment for federal intervention.  In the aftermath of Super Tuesday, it is interesting to remember that Senator Obama introduced say on pay in the US Senate.

Full post as published by The Race to the Bottom on February 08, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0136 secs (new cache)