La modificación del deber de diligencia
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication date
2021
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Thomson Reuters Aranzadi
Citation
Abstract
A propósito de la modificación operada en la LSC por la Ley 5/2021, de 12 de abril, en los que respecta al fomento de la implicación a largo plazo de los accionistas en las sociedades cotizadas, se ha reformado el artículo 225.1 de la misma Ley, donde se contiene la formulación del contenido básico del deber general de diligencia de los administradores en toda sociedad de capital. A pesar de que la implementación de la Directiva 2017/828, de fomento de la implicación a largo plazo de los accionistas no exigía esta reforma, el legislador ha incorporado una mención algo controvertida, añadiendo a aquella formulación del deber de diligencia la exigencia adicional de que el administrador debe “subordinar, en todo caso, su interés particular al interés de la empresa”. Este trabajo analiza desde una perspectiva crítica esta reforma.
The reform of the Spanish Companies Law (LSC) by means of Law 5/2021, of April 12, on the promotion of long-term involvement of shareholders in listed companies, has affected article 225.1 as well. This provision contains the formulation of the general duty of diligence of directors. Although the implementation of the Directive 2017/828, to promote the long-term involvement of shareholders, did not require this reform, the legislator added to that formulation that the director must "subordinate, in any case, his particular interest to the interest of the enterprise". This paper analyses this reform from a critical perspective.
The reform of the Spanish Companies Law (LSC) by means of Law 5/2021, of April 12, on the promotion of long-term involvement of shareholders in listed companies, has affected article 225.1 as well. This provision contains the formulation of the general duty of diligence of directors. Although the implementation of the Directive 2017/828, to promote the long-term involvement of shareholders, did not require this reform, the legislator added to that formulation that the director must "subordinate, in any case, his particular interest to the interest of the enterprise". This paper analyses this reform from a critical perspective.