会社法第423条
Directors' and Officers' Liability for Damages to the Company
役員等の会社に対する損害賠償責任
Plain-language explanation
Article 423 of the Companies Act establishes that directors, accounting advisors, company auditors, executive officers, and accounting auditors (collectively "officers") are liable to compensate the company for damages caused by their neglect of duty. In plain terms, if an officer breaches their duty of care or loyalty—whether through a bad decision, a conflict-of-interest transaction, or an oversight—and the company suffers a loss as a result, the company can sue that officer for damages.
This article is the legal foundation for shareholder derivative suits (Article 847), and in practice the central question is almost always whether a particular business decision or action counts as "neglect of duty" rather than an ordinary business risk that simply didn't pay off. Courts generally apply something like a "business judgment rule": if the officer gathered reasonable information and followed a sound decision-making process, they are usually protected even if the outcome was bad. But clear violations—approving a related-party deal without proper authorization, ignoring known legal violations, or failing basic oversight duties—are much more likely to trigger liability.
It's important to distinguish this from liability to third parties (outside creditors, business partners, or individual shareholders), which is covered separately under Article 429. Partial waivers or caps on this liability are addressed in Articles 425–427. For business owners and executives, the practical takeaway is that documentation matters: keeping clear minutes of board discussions, showing due diligence before major decisions, and following proper approval processes for related-party transactions are the best defenses against a future Article 423 claim.
日本語での解説
会社法第423条は、取締役、会計参与、監査役、執行役、会計監査人といった「役員等」が、その任務を怠った(任務懈怠)ことによって会社に損害を与えた場合、その損害を賠償する責任を負うことを定めた条文です。つまり、経営者や役員が善管注意義務や忠実義務に違反する行為を行い、それが原因で会社に損害が発生した場合、会社はその役員等に対して損害賠償を請求できるということです。
この条文は株主代表訴訟(会社法847条)の基礎ともなっており、経営判断の誤りが単なる結果論ではなく「任務懈怠」と評価されるかどうかが実務上の最大の争点になります。たとえば、利益相反取引を承認なく行った場合や、法令違反行為を看過した場合などは、任務懈怠が認定されやすくなります。逆に、合理的な情報収集と判断過程を経た経営判断(経営判断の原則)であれば、結果的に損失が生じても責任を免れることが多いです。
注意すべき点は、この責任は「会社に対する」責任であり、第三者(取引先や株主個人)に対する責任は別途会社法429条で規定されている点です。また、責任の一部免除や限定については会社法425条〜427条で別途手当てされています。役員等はこの条文の存在を前提に、日頃から意思決定プロセスの記録化や、取締役会での十分な議論を残すことがリスク管理上重要になります。
Common scenarios
- ▸取締役が承認手続きを経ずに会社と利益相反取引を行い、会社に損失が生じたケース
- ▸経営陣が粉飾決算や法令違反を見逃し、結果的に会社が制裁金や損害賠償を負ったケース
- ▸株主代表訴訟で取締役の経営判断の是非が争われるケース
- ▸監査役が不正の兆候を見過ごし、内部統制上の問題を放置したケース
- ▸M&Aやリスクの高い投資判断で、取締役会での十分な検討がなされないまま損失が発生したケース
Related statutes
- 会社法第429条
- 会社法第847条
- 会社法第425条
- 会社法第426条
Does this affect your contract?
Hanko AI reviews your contracts against 会社法第423条 and other Japanese statutes in under 60 seconds.
Review your contract free →Generated by Hanko AI from the official Japanese statute corpus. A general statutory reference for the practising attorney. Confirm the current statute against the facts of your matter.