Ýêîíîìè÷åñêèå íàóêè / 3. Ôèíàíñîâûå îòíîøåíèÿ

 

Tetiana Bui

Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor

National university of Kyiv-Mohyla academy

Olena Primierova

Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor

National university of Kyiv-Mohyla academy

 

ISSUES OF LEGAL RISKS AND LAWSUITS

AND THEIR IMPACT ON THE VALUE OF COMPANIES

 

One of the most familiar, but least understood,

intangible assets is a firm’s reputation.

Simon Cole [1, p. 47]

 

Introduction. The concept of company value is one of the central in corporate finances. The maximization of the market valuation of the entire capital of the company is considered in corporate finance as a primary. However, the process of identifying of value factors is not as simple as it seems at first glance, because in recent decades the gap between the value of enterprises recorded in their financial statements and the assessment of this value by investors has significantly widened. Different companies' researches have shown that about 40% of market value is not reflected in the reporting - investors do not pay for current assets, not for current period profits, but for the possibility for generating cash flow and profit in the future [2, p. 11]. Consequently, the issues of image and business reputation of companies are becoming increasingly important in the context that they are considered by investors in their assessment of the attractiveness of investments in companies.

As it follows from the definition and characteristics of the business reputation of the business entity, its essence is the prestige of the firm (commercial) name, trademarks and other relevant subjects of intangible assets in the environment of consumers of goods and services of such entity. As it is stated in paragraph 5 of the Information Letter of the Supreme Economic Court of Ukraine of March 28, 2007, No. 01-8 / 184 "On certain issues of the practice of applying economic laws to information law", the monetary equivalent of a business reputation can be expressed in the form of goodwill [3].

In developed countries reputational capital is valued for at least as tangible assets; it is taken on an equal footing with intellectual and marketing assets. As of 1 January 2012 it accounted for close to 26% of the total market capitalization of the S&P500, US$3,190bn of shareholder value. At the same time it was delivering US$770bn of value across the FTSE100 and US$67bn across the FTSE250 [1, p. 59]. There are firms, especially in PR business, whose reputation reaches 80% of the market value of the company. The drop in the reputation index of the company by only 1% leads to losses in the share price by 3-5% [4, p. 54]. A loud scandal may even drop the price of the company on the market. Therefore, communication and PR-activity in many companies comes for the first place, overstating the importance of production itself. And reputation management has become a major task for companies, especially those who seek to conquer new markets and rely on long and successful work in the business community.

Business reputation of the company determines the idea of ​​the company as a business entity. Business reputation of the company contains moral and ethical and business features of enterprise management, stable partnerships with suppliers, attraction and maintenance of professional personnel, personnel management system.

Recently the issues of legal risks and court decisions and their impact on the value of companies are becoming particularly important. Therefore, it is important and relevant to consider legal and judicial risks for the image and value of companies.

Main part. Legal risk could be defined as the risk of financial or reputational loss that can result from lack of awareness or misunderstanding of, ambiguity in, or reckless indifference to, the way law and regulation apply to the business, their processes, products and services. 

Legal risk can take many forms, beyond losses from lawsuits or criminal and regulatory penalties. Some companies decide to settle litigation rather than be subject to prolonged court cases. Settlement is designed to limit negative publicity and avoid prolonged reputation damage. The peculiarities and concrete forms depend on national legislation and may differentiate in different countries.

The four major categories of manifestation of legal risk are contractual, structural, regulatory, and litigation risk. In this paper we will focus on litigation risk. Litigation exposure can result from either company-initiated or external-party-initiated lawsuits. Company-initiated litigation occurs when company management initiates legal proceedings for such reasons as to enforce contract rights. External-party-initiated litigation occurs when an action has been threatened or initiated against the company. This litigation may involve allegations of errors, omissions, violations of law, damages, or personal injury caused by the company, its management, or its staff.

Risks associated with the participation of the organization in administrative, criminal or civil proceedings combine both legal cases for counterparty claims, and those initiated by the companies themselves, as well as state authorities. In the allocation of such risks, specific grounds for actions, the amount of the claim or the assigned penalty may be taken into account. In the opinion of psychologists, "the very fact of recognizing the corporation as "criminal" also matters, as a result of which it is morally condemned, loses creditors' trust, loses clients, may face a boycott of its goods, and lose the opportunity to receive government orders" [5]. In modern conditions when the advent of streaming news and social media means that local company’s issues can become global concerns in minutes. The nature of risk is evolving, and more than ever, companies need to be prepared to manage problem situations with law suits faster [6].

Litigations could be a reason of a negative public opinion. A damaged reputation may affect the company’s ability to establish new relationships or services or to continue servicing existing relationships, which may adversely affect current and future earnings. Widely publicized litigation, regardless of its ultimate outcome, can affect a company’s community standing, limit its business opportunities, and reduce its value [7]. There are many evidences of such development of events.  For example company Texaco suffered huge shareholder losses and consumer boycotts as a result of disclosure of apparent violations of antidiscrimination laws [8, p. 352].

Alexander Kotlyar, the head of the control and legal department of the industrial equipment company of Danfoss LLC is sure that participation in court proceedings should be considered as a very topical risk and companies should seek ways to reduce it [5]. After all, the availability of litigation is actively covered in the business press and negatively affects the attitude of investors. For example, Samsung stocks lost in value 7.7 percent in the first hours of trading on the Seoul stock exchange on Monday, August 27. The fall in the share price of Samsung became the largest since October 2008. A sharp drop in Samsung's stock quotes occurred after late in the evening on Friday, August 24, a trial in San Jose, California, which dealt with a patent dispute between a South Korean corporation and Apple, decided in favor of the latter [9]. Thus, investors' reaction to news about lawsuits and court decisions can very quickly affect the real value of the stocks and lead to a significant loss of the company's value.

Of course costs of reputational damage can verify and depends on different factors such as: publicly disclosed facts; facts of the crime and seriousness of crime; compliance, self-reporting, cooperation; information on nexus between crime and counter parties; information on quality internal governance; mandates imposed; post-crime reforms [10]. Presence or absence of these factors can affect the reputational cost. But in the broad sense the criminal activity or non-compliance with laws, all violations always influence the business reputation and image both from the economic and everyday points of view. It is can be described as some instinct - a reaction to the word "criminal": the reader will always pay attention to the publication of the new criminal case. Given that the cost of goodwill is often estimated at millions of dollars and the fact that it affects the value of the company's stocks, it is clear that, in addition to the legal punishment, the legal entity will have other consequences: negative impact on the business reputation included in intangible assets, expressed in quite a material loss of hundreds or millions of dollars.

In our opinion, it can be said that the criminal liability of a legal entity affects not only business reputation and image, but in general the whole company activity. The society, consumers, business partners form their attitude to the company, its products, and provided services based on information provided by both the company itself and the media. As an example, we can consider the case from the Indian drug manufacturer Ranbaxy Laboratories (India - the fourth-largest producer of medical products in the world). The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) took measures against the company. The FDA limited the import of the goods produced by the company in Toans (for 6 years the FDA imposed a ban on the import of goods from four factories of Ranbaxy). This decision was made as a result of a check conducted in January 2014, during which a large number of violations were found, including it was found that the laboratory staff presented the results of testing that were not true. The media already attribute Ranbaxy to corporate criminals: in 2013 Ranbaxy paid a fine of $ 500 million and pleaded guilty to seven criminal points in connection with the sale of counterfeit medicines to deceive and conceal the fact that these medications did not match certification and knowingly false statements to the government. Despite the efforts of the company's advertising department, public statements about the introduction of new technologies, management methods and a strict code of conduct, information is regularly received that Ranbaxy stocks fell by 9%, 18%, 20% [11, p. 86].

Some companies were involved in such high-profile scandals that it was the reason for their closure. Reputation is a very important characteristic in the financial services market. Having gained reputation due to violation of standards and legislation can become dramatic for companies. Thus, Arthur Andersen (LLP, formerly one of the "Big Five" accounting firms) in 2002 voluntarily surrendered its licenses to practice as Certified Public Accountants in the United States after being found guilty of criminal charges relating to the firm's handling of the auditing of Enron.

Finally, even if a firm can avoid legal liability, ‘‘market liability” provides another obstacle to the effective use of judgment proof agents. A firm’s reputation may be placed in jeopardy if it is known to be involved in criminal or illegitimate activities. Reputations matter very much. That is why firms often overcomply with regulations, spending millions of dollars on self-promotional ventures to improve their image with consumers and regulators [12].

One of the most significant in this context is the example of the trial of McDonald's Corporation against environmental activists Helen Steel and David Morris [1997], which is known as "the McLibel case”. This process (it counts 313 court sessions) became the longest in English history. And as he gained strength, the press paid him more and more attention. Millions of people watched this trial. And the more delayed the process was, the more harm it brought to McDonaid’s. As a result, accusations of food poisoning, contributing to the spread of cancer and the robbery of third world countries were considered groundless. However, this victory in court could not compensate for the losses suffered by the company because of such a long judicial time and harmful information spread by TV, radio and newspapers [13, p. 86-89].

Conclusions.  The issues of legal risks and court decisions and their impact on the value of companies are becoming particularly important today. All of possible results of corporate law violations can be very harmful for company, including steep monetary penalties, suspension or termination of contracts, and as a result - plummeting share price. So companies should pay much attention in managing legal risks.

The method of mitigation of such risks is the maintenance of statistics of court cases and analysis of the reasons for their occurrence and their elimination - there may be a gap in the logistic system of the company or there are no standard forms of contracts, or there is no feedback from consumers and an effective pre-trial way of resolving claims. The criminal liability of a company always influences its business reputation and image both from the economic and everyday points of view. In addition to the legal punishment, the legal entity will have other consequences: negative impact on the business reputation included in intangible assets, expressed in a loss of hundreds or millions of dollars.

Companies in the modern world should closely monitor compliance with laws and regulations. There is little doubt that legal proceedings pose a large risk to firms. Event studies report significantly negative stock market reactions upon the announcement of lawsuits [14, p. 2]. To avoid losses due to lawsuits, it is better to proactively monitor the activities and information that appears in the press. May be the presence of legal risks and their strong influence on the value of companies will lead not only to better management in the companies themselves, but to greater compliance with laws in general.

References:

1.     Cole, S. (2012) The Impact of Reputation on Market Value. World Economics, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 47-68.

2.     Ostrovskaya, G., Seredinskaya I. (2009) Review of theoretical concepts of strategic management based on the growth of value. Galician Economic Bulletin, No. 1, pp. 10-18.

3.     Information letter of the Supreme Economic Court of Ukraine dated March 28, 2007, No. 01-8 / 184 "On certain issues of the practice of application by economic courts of information law”.

4.     Buryak, G., Kovalchuk Yu., (2012) International Management By Reputation Capital In Modern Business Environment. International Trade: economics, finance, law,  No. 6 , pp. 52-55.

5.     Shuvalova, A. (2014) Is the system of legal risk assessment a luxury or a necessity? Electronic sourcehttp://www.garant.ru/article/583261/#ixzz4lWNxzIwC.

6.     Little, G., Mathews R., and Pell, O. (2015) The evolving nature of legal risk. Electronic source. Available at: https://www.whitecase.com/publications/insight/evolving-nature-legal-risk

7.     Litigation and  Other Legal Matters. Ofce of the Comptroller of the Currency Paper. Electronic source. Available at https://www.occ.gov/publications/publications-by-type/comptrollers-handbook/pub-ch-m-litigation-and-other-legal-matters.pdf

8.      Enterprise risk management: today’s leading research and best practices for tomorrow’s executives / John Fraser, Betty J. Simkins p. cm. – (The Robert W. Kolb series in finance).

9.     Samsung lost in its value 7.7%. Electronic source. Available at: http://news.finance.ua/ru/news/-/286360/samsung-poteryal-v-stoimosti-7-7-iz-za-resheniya-suda.

10.                        Arlen, J., Alexander, C. Does conviction matter? The reputational and collateral effects of corporate crime. Electronic source. Available at: https://economix.fr/pdf/seminaires/lien/Alexander.Arlen.Reputation.pdf

11.                        Balzhinimaeva, V. (2015) Criminal and legal risks: reputation and image of business // Law. Journal of Higher School of Economics, ¹1, pp. 81-90.

12.                        Brooks, R. (2002) Liability and Organizational Choice: Theory and Evidence from the Oil Shipping Industry. Journal of Law and Economics, vol. XLV, pp. 91-125.

13.                        Haig, M. (2003) The biggest mistakes of branding / Trans. with English by Bozhuk E. - SPb.: Publishing House "Neva".

14.                        Colonnello, S., Herpfer, C. (2016) Do Courts Matter for Firm Value? Evidence from the U.S. Court System. Electronic source. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2686621 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2686621