This article analyses whether the Australian statutory Business Judgment Rule (BJR) has adequately fulfilled the expectation of the legislature,¹ namely, to protect the authority of directors in the exercise of their duties but not to insulate them from liability; to encourage directors to take advantage of opportunities involving responsible risk taking; to confirm the common law position that Courts will rarely review bona fide business decisions; to provide a clear presumption in favour of a director's judgment; and to provide legal certainty. This question is answered by reference to how the Australian Courts have applied the BJR. This article outlines the finding that the rule has not met the legislative aims, based on an examination of all of the cases which have considered the BJR since its enactment.

本文分析了澳大利亚法定的商业判断规则（BJR）是否已充分履行了立法机关的预期，¹即保护董事的权力在履行职责的行使，但不能从责任隔离他们。鼓励董事利用涉及负责任的冒险的机会；确认普通法的立场，即法院很少审查善意的商业决定；为董事的判断提供明确的推定；并提供法律确定性。通过参考澳大利亚法院如何适用BJR可以回答此问题。本文根据对自BJR颁布以来考虑过BJR的所有案例的审查，概述了该规则未达到立法目的的发现。