Ethics, bankruptcy and greed: the unintended consequences for landlords of the 2005 bankruptcy amendments Online publication date: Thu, 20-Oct-2011
by Harlan D. Platt; Christopher R. Mirick; Marjorie B. Platt
International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics (IJBGE), Vol. 6, No. 3, 2011
Abstract: The 2005 amendments to the United States Bankruptcy Code dramatically shifted the relative power of commercial landlords vis-à-vis their tenants. Landlords lobbied Congress for these amendments to capture the option value of unexpired commercial leases. The result has been a decrease in the number of successful retail reorganisations. Viewed purely from a profit making perspective, the landlords' actions are hard to criticise. However, ethical theories, such as Integrated Social Contracts Theory (ISCT) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), envision a broader set of responsibilities in a business context, to which the landlords did not adhere in their quest for higher profits.
Online publication date: Thu, 20-Oct-2011
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics (IJBGE):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:
Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.
If you still need assistance, please email email@example.com