Russian Law Journal

Advanced search

Reasonable Entrepreneurial Risk: Behavioural Criteria for Corporate Managers

Full Text:


This paper discusses the essence of the entrepreneurial risk, ethical and legal standards, which must be adhered to by the head of a commercial organisation. In the Russian legislation, there is debate concerning the boundaries of the responsibilities of the corporate manager. Existing literature doesn't contain many studies about the norms on the responsibility of persons authorised to act on behalf of a legal entity because it is new for Russian civil legislation, which shows the novelty of this study. We identify problematic aspects that arise both in the doctrine and judicial practice regarding the determination of the criteria of good faith and reasonable behaviour of the head of the corporation. Our study examines the legal nature of entrepreneurial risk and how it affects the formation of managerial decisions. As a result, we propose a basic model of the criteria for the good behaviour of a corporate manager within a reasonable entrepreneurial risk.

About the Authors

Sergey Sosnovskikh
De Montfort University
United Kingdom

Lecturer in Business and Management, De Montfort University

The Gateway, Leicester, LE1 9BH, United Kingdom

Oxana Cherkasova
Ural Federal University
Russian Federation

Senior Lecturer in Civil Law, Ural Federal University

51 Lenin Av., Yekaterinburg, 620075, Russia


1. Bereskin F. et al. Whistle Blowing, Forced CEO Turnover, and Misconduct: The Role of Socially Minded Employees and Directors, 66(1) Manag. Sci. 24 (2019).

2. Birds J.R. Proper Purposes as a Head of Directors' Duties, 37(5) mod. L. Rev. 580 (1974).

3. Busenitz L.W. Entrepreneurial Risk and Strategic Decision Making: It's a Matter of Perspective, 35(3) J. Appl. Behav. 325 (1999).

4. Campbell R.B., Jr. & Frost C.W. Managers' Fiduciary Duties in Financially Distressed Corporations: Chaos in Delaware (andElsewhere), 32(3) J. Corp. L. 491 (2007).

5. Cassidy J. Concise Corporations Law (5th ed. 2006).

6. Collison D. et al. Financialization and Company Law: A Study of the UK Company Law Review, 25(1) Crit. Perspect. Account. 5 (2014).

7. Crotty J. Corporate Social Responsibility in the Russian Federation: A Contextualized Approach, 55(6) Bus. Soc. 825 (2014).

8. Dbe A. Regulating the Conduct of Directors, 10(1) J. Corp. L. Stud. 1 (2010).

9. De Schutter O. Corporate Social Responsibility European Style, 14(2) Eur. L.J. 203 (2008).

10. Drew M.E. & Walk A.N. Investment Governance for Fiduciaries (2019).

11. Farrar J.H. & Watson S. Self-Dealing, Fair Dealing and Related Party Transactions - History, Policy and Reform, 11(2) J. Corp. L. Stud. 495 (2011).

12. Filatotchev i. & Nakajima C. Corporate Governance, Responsible Managerial Behavior, and Corporate Social Responsibility: Organizational Efficiency Versus Organizational Legitimacy?, 28(3) Acad. Manag. Perspect. 289 (2014).

13. Fleisher C.S. & Bensoussan B.E. Business and Competitive Analysis: Effective Application of New and Classic Methods (2nd ed. 2015).

14. Heindler F. Corporate and Unitary Legal Entities in Russia (2018).

15. Ho J.K.S. "Director's Duty to Promote the Success of the Company": Should Hong Kong Implement a Similar Provision?, 10(1) J. Corp. L. Stud. 17 (2010).

16. Hodges C. Law and Corporate Behaviour: Integrating Theories of Regulation, Enforcement, Compliance and Ethics (2015).

17. Hood P. Directors' Duties Under the Companies Act2006: Clarity or Confusion?, 13(1) J. Corp. L. Stud. 1 (2013). https://doi.Org/10.5235/14735970.13.1.1

18. Horn L. Corporate Governance in Crisis? The Politics of EU Corporate Governance Regulation, 18(1) Eur. L.J. 83 (2012).

19. Johnson G. et al. Exploring Strategy (2014).

20. Langford R.T. The Duty of Directors to Act Bona Fide in the Interests of the Company: A Positive Fiduciary Duty? Australia and the UK Compared, 11(1) J. Corp. L. Stud. 215 (2011).

21. Maggs P.B. et al. Law and Legal System of the Russian Federation (6th ed. 2015). Malecki C. Corporate Social Responsibility: Perspectives for Sustainable Corporate Governance (2018).

22. Marnet O. Behavior and Rationality in Corporate Governance, 39(3) J. econ. Issues 613 (2015).

23. Mintzberg H. Strategy-Making in Three Modes, 16(2) Calif. manag. rev. 44 (1973).

24. Nosworthy B. A Director's Fiduciary Duty of Disclosure: The Case(s) Against, 39(4) u.N.S.W.L.J. 1389 (2016).

25. Orlov V. Introduction to Business Law in Russia (2013).

26. Ribstein L.E. Are Partners Fiduciaries?, 2005(1) u. Ill. L. rev. 209 (2005).

27. Sheikh S. A Guide to the Companies Act 2006 (2013).

28. Shostak S.A. Russia Corporate, Financial, and Commercial Law (2018).

29. Torwegge C. Englisches Recht. In: Treue- und Sorgfaltspflichten im englischen und deutschen Gesellschaftsrecht (2009).

30. Tricker B. Corporate Governance: Principles, Policies, and Practices (2015).

31. van Greuning H. & Brajovic-Bratanovic S. Analyzing Banking Risk: A Framework for Assessing Corporate Governance and Risk Management (3rd ed. 2009).

For citation:

Sosnovskikh S., Cherkasova O. Reasonable Entrepreneurial Risk: Behavioural Criteria for Corporate Managers. Russian Law Journal. 2021;9(1):58-80.

Views: 612

ISSN 2309-8678 (Print)
ISSN 2312-3605 (Online)