Q&A with Governance Expert Bob Monks (Part 1, on Social Costs and ESG Research)

(The following interview appeared as part of GovernanceMetrics International’sFounders’ Forum. GMI is the leading independent provider of global corporate governance and ESG ratings and research. Corporate stakeholders – including leading investors, insurers, auditors, regulators and others – use GovernanceMetrics services to identify and monitor risks related to non-financial measures covering key environmental, social, governance and […]

Video: Stanford’s Joe Grundfest on Diversity on Corporate Boards

Video of Joe Grundfest shedding light on the issuessurrounding diversity on corporate boards, making the point that: The argument and agenda for diversity isbigger and stronger than the argument that is based simply on the statistical data, and that not everything shows up in the stock price.

http://rockcenter.stanford.edu/2010/07/23/joe-grundfest-on-diversity-on-corporate-boards/

Supreme Court Decides Who Is the ‘Maker’ of a Statement Under Section 10(b)

On June 13, in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed the circumstances under which a defendant can be held liable in a private action under Rule 10b-5 for “making” a false or misleading statement. The decision held that an investment adviser did not “make” statements contained in prospectuses of the adviser’s mutual fund clients, even though the adviser may have assisted the mutual funds in preparing the statements.

ACGA’s Submission to Hong Kong Exchange

From ACGA's web site:  In mid-April, ACGA submitted our response to the December 17, 2010 Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited (HKEx) consultation paper on proposed changes to the Code on Corporate Governance Practices and certain Listing Rules related to corporate governance.

ACGA analysed and offered responses on nine issues: