英文摘要 |
In 2012, the Taiwan Company Act began to regulate de facto and shadow directors of public companies, and under the 2018 amendment, regulation was extended to nonpublic companies. De facto and shadow directors are not defined as directors but are subject to the same civil and criminal liabilities as directors are. Because current law in Taiwan is silent on the duties of de facto and shadow directors, such duties remain a topic of discussion and subject to potential amendments. This article compares the law in Taiwan with that in other jurisdictions that have specific laws regulating de facto and shadow directors. The author reviews some major domestic and foreign judicial decisions involving de facto and shadow directors. The discussion centers on the following concerns: (1) How are de facto and shadow directors defined in other jurisdictions? (2) Do foreign laws impose director duties on de facto and shadow directors? If so, how? (3) Are there criteria or a test for determining one's status as a de facto or shadow director? (4) Are de facto and shadow directors subject to the same liabilities as a director? This article begins with a discussion of a leading Taiwan Supreme Court ruling addressing the issue of whether a de facto director can be treated as the representative of a legal entity and then reviews the judicial decisions handed down after the addition of Article 8 Paragraph 3 to the Company Act as well as foreign cases. The purpose of this article is to indicate the criteria or test for identifying de facto and shadow directors and determmine their legal responsibilities. |