tag

A basic principle of corporate governance (CG) relates to the board of directors of the company, wherein the company shall be headed by an effective, collegial and informative board. Herein, if you are a board member, you need to ask yourself, where do we stand in this? To achieve the goal, all members of the board of directors should understand the role and responsibilities of the board as stipulated in the “Company Law”, the relevant articles and memorandum of association of the company, the board charter, the corporate culture and the corporate governance code. This stand or mission, in particular, highlights that the role of the board of directors is different from the role of the shareholders of the company (whose interests the board serves) and, also, the role of the executives officers working in the company. In particular, members of the board of directors should fully understand the board’s fiduciary duties of care and degree of loyalty to the company and the shareholders. Members of the board of directors are responsible both individually and collectively for performing these responsibilities, which cannot be transferred or delegated to other persons in the company. When a new director is appointed, the chairman of the board assisted by the legal advisor and compliance officer of the company, should review the board’s role and duties with all members of the board of directors, particularly covering the legal and regulatory requirements and the code of corporate governance. The company should have a written appointment letteragreement with each member of the board of directors including the powers and duties of the director in addition to other matters relating to his appointment including his term, the time commitment envisaged, the committee assignment if any, his remuneration and expense reimbursement entitlement, and his access to independent professional advice when and if needed. The board of directors should consider adopting a formal board “charter” or other statement specifying matters which are reserved to it, which should include, but need not be limited to the specific items stated in the Company Law. An alternative is a formal statement or by-law stating the functions and authority delegated to the officers as mentioned in the Company Law. The board of directors should be collegial and deliberative for the sake of gaining the benefit of each member of the board, its judgment and experience. The chairman should take an active lead in promoting mutual trust, open discussion, constructive dissent and support for decisions after they have been made. The board of directors should meet frequently, usually more than the minimum required by law. All members of the board of directors should attend the meetings, and the board should maintain informal communication between meetings. Unexcused absence(s) is not welcomed as it may disturb the functions of the board of directors and indicates that the person is not the type of those needed for an efficient board directorship as stipulated in the corporate governance code. Regarding attendance, more control measures are required and continuous absence could lead to termination of membership. Commitment and accountability reflect the effectiveness of the board and are essentially required and should be observed by all members of the board of directors, taking into account that they are supposed to excel and give good example to all related parties in the company, the shareholders and community stakeholders. If you are a board member, you need to ask yourself where you stand in this and if you are effective enough to make the board more effective, as required for corporate governance purposes. An active role by each board member will lead to the best corporate governance results.Dr AbdelGadir Warsama Ghalib is a corporate legal counsel. Email: [email protected] 

It’s been a record year for deals involving Japanese companies, with transaction volume approaching $350bn as December draws to a close. And next year is poised to be even busier.Corporate governance reforms aimed at improving shareholder returns are helping to transform Japan into a hive of activity — the days when it was seen as a slow market with an occasional megadeal thrown in are disappearing fast.“Dealmaking in Japan is incredibly busy,” said Chris Laskowski, head of Asia investment banking at Jefferies Financial Group Inc. “I spend a lot more time talking to our colleagues there now than any time before.”The ground is fertile, with conglomerates selling non-core assets and private equity firms hungry to deploy capital. Activism is also playing a stronger role — take Elliott Investment Management’s battle with none other than Toyota Motor Corp around a blockbuster plan to privatise Toyota Industries Corp.“Japan is going through a wave of M&A like we’ve not seen for a long time,” said Mayooran Elalingam, head of investment banking & capital markets in Asia Pacific at Deutsche Bank AG.Just this Friday, Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc confirmed it will take a 20% stake in India’s Shriram Finance Ltd for about $4.4bn.Japan is one of Asia’s most mature markets and home to some of the biggest transactions, so mergers and acquisitions can translate into higher fees for dealmakers. No surprise, then, that global firms including Citigroup Inc, Goldman Sachs Group Inc and Jefferies are bulking up their teams.This year has been bookended by a takeover fight between global buyout firms KKR & Co and Bain Capital over software firm Fuji Soft Inc and now Carlyle Group Inc launching a takeover offer for Hogy Medical Co.“We’re likely to see many more take-privates in Japan,” said Rohit Chatterji, head of M&A in APAC at JPMorgan Chase & Co. They’ll include “listed affiliates that are deemed core to the parent, or of standalone companies where traded valuations are not reflective of intrinsic value.”One of the biggest deals involved Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corp taking over NTT Data Group Corp for more than $16bn. Meanwhile, Nippon Steel Corp finally closed its acquisition of United States Steel Corp.There are still some challenges with transactions in Japan, according Ian Ho, a partner at law firm Simpson Thacher & Bartlett in Hong Kong.“Having deep business relationships and local talent are key,” said Ho, who is also co-head of the firm in Asia. “While the interest and opportunities are real, it may take some time for some of the newcomers to gain significant traction.”One headline deal casualty this year involved the Japanese operator of 7-Eleven stores. Canada’s Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc ended up abandoning its $46bn bid after a roughly yearlong campaign, saying that Seven & i Holdings Co had refused meaningful engagement. The Japanese firm rejected that charge.Ultimately, though, 2025 is a big success story for Japan-related deals. Other multibillion-dollar cases include SoftBank Group Corp acquiring Ampere Computing from a consortium including Carlyle and Oracle Corp for $6.5bn, as well as a $5.8bn buyout of SCSK Corp by Sumitomo Corp. SoftBank has also been part of massive funding rounds for OpenAI and is eyeing more data centre deals.Financial sponsors focused on buyouts in the lower-to-mid tier have been prolific too, with investors allocating more capital to Japan, as well as markets such as India and South Korea.“While the deals may be smaller in value, they are generating solid returns,” said Adam Furber, also at Simpson Thacher as a partner and co-head of Asia.On dealmaking channels, a fruitful corridor is emerging between Japan and India, as Friday’s MUFJ-Shriram Finance deal shows. Another Japanese bank, Mizuho Financial Group Inc, also announced it is buying a controlling stake in KKR-backed investment bank Avendus Capital Pvt.Adding to the M&A pile leading into 2026, Taiyo Holdings Co is up for grabs, with KKR the frontrunner among private equity firms vying for the chemical manufacturer, people familiar with the matter said on Friday. 

Legal PerspectiveThe duties of the directors and officers in companies, are governed by the provisions of the company law, the articles and memorandum of association of the company and, moreover, the corporate governance rules. Herein, we mention that, the directors of the company and the officers are to be taken as agents of the company. However, always, the directors share with the officers the same fiduciary duties that an agent owes the principal. The recent trend, in the corporate transactions, has been to raise the standard of conduct required of directors and officers.There are fiduciary duties that the officers and the directors owe to their company including, the duty to act within one’s authority and within the powers of the company as mentioned in its activities. And, there is also the duty to act diligently and with due care in conducting the affairs of the company. Moreover, the duty is also act with loyalty and good faith for the benefit of the company.Directors and officers must act within the authority given to them by the company, by the law, the articles, and the related bylaws. The directors and or the officers may be liable to the company if it is damaged by an act exceeding their authority or if they act outside of the scope of the corporation’s authority.However, if they enter an “ultra vires” transaction, justifiably believing it to be within the scope of the company’s business, they are not held liable. Like any principal, a company may ratify an unauthorised act by its directors and officers or other agents. This may be done through a resolution of the board of directors or of the shareholders. It may also be implied from acceptance of benefits from the unauthorised act. Ratification, when it occurs, releases the directors or the officers from any liability to the company and binds the company as if the act originally had been authorised.The company, as a legal juristic person, can’t take actions by itself nor is it able to do such work. Simply, it is impossible. Therefore, this role is vested, by law, on the directors and officers of the company who step into the shoes of the company and take its role on its behalf.However, the law provides that, the directors and the officers shall perform their duties within the required parameters of the law, in addition, to the customary regular practices in the same field. Attention, professionalism and wisdom are all required from the directors and the officers in the company.Needless to say, that in case of any negligence or malpractice or fraudulent acts by any one, it will straight open the way for criminal and or civil litigation against the concerned. No doubt, all directors or officers in all companies, should excel in performing their duties to achieve best results for themselves, their companies and the whole society. This is what we are all looking for and anticipating from such honest and high calibre personnel. Dr AbdelGadir Warsama Ghalib is a corporate legal counsel. Email: [email protected]