← All Authorities
United States Leading Case duty to promote success s172

Malone v Brincat

722 A.2d 5 (Del. 1998)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtDelaware Supreme Court
Year1998
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Directors owe stockholders a fiduciary duty of disclosure when communicating with them, even outside a transactional context requiring stockholder action.

Key Principle

Directors owe stockholders a fiduciary duty of disclosure when communicating with them, even outside a transactional context requiring stockholder action.

Area of Law

corporate

Related Cases

ASIC v Cassimatis (No 8) (2016) 336 ALR 209

Directors breached their duty of care under s.180 Corporations Act by failing to prevent the company from providing inappropriate financial advice to retail clients.

Tornetta v Musk C.A. No. 2018-0408-KSJM (Del. Ch. 2024)

Board compensation decisions favouring a controlling stockholder require entire fairness review; subsequent stockholder ratification does not restore business judgment deference.

Slack Technologies LLC v Pirani 598 U.S. 759 (2023)

Section 11 of the Securities Act requires plaintiffs to trace their shares to the allegedly misleading registration statement; claims fail where shares cannot be so traced in a direct listing.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Malone v Brincat and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Malone v Brincat