kaal:claim:kaal-2013-acomparativeperspectiveo-005

Under Delaware law as applied in In re Citigroup, directors' incorrect evaluation of business risk and their inability to predict the future do not violate the duty of oversight, so the Caremark duty to monitor is not extended to business risk.

According to the Delaware Chancery court, directors' incorrect evaluation of business risk and their inability to predict the future did not violate directors' duty of oversight.

Kaal, A Comparative Perspective on the Limitations of the Duty of Oversight – A Comment on Lisa Fairfax (2013), Introduction, discussing In re Citigroup, p. 5
· source PDF

Kaal, A Comparative Perspective on the Limitations of the Duty of Oversight – A Comment on Lisa Fairfax (2013)

• Delaware law
• claims framed as failures to monitor business risk

empiricalsupport: evidencedrisk-and-incentivescorporate-governancelaw-and-legal-systems

• restates kaal:claim:1558614-027 In In re Citigroup the Delaware Court of Chancery refused to extend the Caremark oversight duty, which concern...
• supports kaal:claim:1558614-023 Because U.S. law frames the inquiry around corporate waste, and most risk taking does not meet the waste stand...

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is ac5c955fe01209c54c78c4575c0b8bf570e5f1259c3f855510697cf51a32e59a. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/c7ac16f55f15b006...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/kaal-2013-acomparativeperspectiveo-005.md | sha256sum