Estimates and disclosure of contingent risks are front and center these days in various contexts. Thus, asbestos-specific estimates and disclosures are prominently mentioned in a new Australian appellate decision in CSR. The opinion was issued at the end of last week, and provides some narrow guidance on solvent schemes of arrangement for companies facing asbestos claiming. A prior post here describes the
I’m setting aside James Hardie and Australia for a few days. News on Friday provides a great springboard for some comments in the same general area of what’s new in mass tort resolution thinking, and some points related to corporate actions to cope with/avoid/limit the corporate damage from mass tort claims.
How does big tobacco admit it faces massive global tort…
The Australian version of the WSJ has an interesting article by a McKinnsey consultant writing about corporate reputation risk, with the article somewhat tied back to James Hardie. An interesting read.
Contingent liabilities are not easy to manage, as exmplified by this month’s events for James Hardie. To begin with, its business is down…
The Australian SEC – known as ASIC – has posted on its website the charges it filed, and a document summarizing which charges were sustained and which were dismissed. All of the charges relate in one way or the other to James Hardie’s contingent risks regarding asbestos claims.
Update: The opinion/judgment is available here