# kaal:claim:kaal-2013-acomparativeperspectiveo-015

**Claim.** The German Federal Court of Justice held in Mannesmann that directors breached their fiduciary duty by awarding a bonus of roughly seventeen million dollars to a chief executive whose tenure had substantially increased shareholder value, whereas Delaware courts imposed no liability for the far larger Ovitz payout in Disney.

**Type.** empirical  **Support.** evidenced

**Holds when.**

- executive compensation decisions
- German versus Delaware adjudication

**Source quote.**

> decision in Mannesmann28 determined that the directors of the German Mannesmann AG breached their fiduciary duty to the company by awarding a bonus of approximately $17 million to the Mannesmann CEO whose tenure at Mannesmann resulted in a substantial increase of shareholder value.

**From.** Kaal, *A Comparative Perspective on the Limitations of the Duty of Oversight – A Comment on Lisa Fairfax* (2013), A Comparative Perspective on the Duty to Monitor, page 6

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

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `ac5c955fe01209c54c78c4575c0b8bf570e5f1259c3f855510697cf51a32e59a` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20-%202013%20-%20A%20Comparative%20Perspective%20on%20the%20Limitations%20of%20the%20Duty%20of%20Oversight%20%E2%80%93%20A%20Comment%20on%20Lisa%20Fairfax.pdf

**Topics.** corporate-governance

**Keywords.** executive-compensation, mannesmann, disney, german-law, fiduciary-duty

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.