ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the enforcement experience in other jurisdictions using case studies from the United Kingdom and Australia. It examines the practical effectiveness of the UK's statutory derivative claims regime, the UK's disqualification regime, and the Australian civil penalty regime. Drawing on empirical data on the incidences of derivative claims in the United Kingdom, it finds that the UK's statutory derivative claims regime remains largely ineffective as a tool for enforcing directors' duties in the country. This is due to the inherent difficulties with the enforcement mechanism, as discussed in the previous chapter. Following this, the chapter examines the UK's disqualification regime. It argues that existing evidence demonstrates its effectiveness as an enforcement mechanism. This effectiveness is, however, limited by the fact that its focus is insolvent companies. Finally, the chapter explores Australia's civil penalty regime and discusses its effectiveness as an enforcement tool. Drawing on existing data, it finds that the Australian civil penalty regime offers effective enforcement for breaches of directors' duties. Consequently, it argues that there exists positive evidence in favour of public enforcement of directors' duties.
