dc.contributor.author |
Liu, Benchao |
en |
dc.date.accessioned |
2016-08-11T00:55:00Z |
en |
dc.date.issued |
2016-01 |
en |
dc.identifier.citation |
Journal of International Banking Law and Regulation, 2016, 31 (2), pp. 75 - 79 |
en |
dc.identifier.issn |
1742-6812 |
en |
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/2292/29913 |
en |
dc.description.abstract |
Under English law, bond trustees only have a limited duty to monitor the performance of the issuer. In contrast, New Zealand law requires trustees appointed for publicly issued bonds to continuously exercise reasonable diligence to ascertain whether the issuer has complied with the trust deed provisions, and whether the issuer’s assets are sufficient to discharge the amounts owed under the bonds. This article discusses two recent New Zealand cases on the duties of bond trustees, and argues that the New Zealand approach is inherently vague and difficult to comply with in practice. |
en |
dc.description.uri |
http://librarysearch.auckland.ac.nz/UOA2_A:Combined_Local:uoa_alma21149028910002091 |
en |
dc.relation.ispartofseries |
Journal of International Banking Law and Regulation |
en |
dc.rights |
Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. |
en |
dc.rights.uri |
https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm |
en |
dc.title |
Why are bond trustees sued more often in New Zealand? An analysis of the duty to monitor under New Zealand law |
en |
dc.type |
Journal Article |
en |
pubs.issue |
2 |
en |
pubs.begin-page |
75 |
en |
pubs.volume |
31 |
en |
pubs.end-page |
79 |
en |
dc.rights.accessrights |
http://purl.org/eprint/accessRights/RestrictedAccess |
en |
pubs.subtype |
Article |
en |
pubs.elements-id |
517847 |
en |
pubs.org-id |
Business and Economics |
en |
pubs.org-id |
Commercial Law |
en |
pubs.record-created-at-source-date |
2016-01-22 |
en |