reword to be a better introduction: In the context of Australian law, it is important to note that courts are mindful of the diverse interests influenced by corporate behaviour. Case law can be used to provide succinct reasoning as to why it is unnecessary to amend s 181 of the Corporations Act 2001(Cth)[1] to guarantee that company directors' decision-making processes "may" consider issues such as environment, social, and governance. While these issues are often viewed as crucial considerations for company directors, it is equally important to recognise the substantial role of a director. Their actions have a far-reaching impact on the community at large, extending beyond just shareholders, employees, and creditors.[2] Although Section 181 has faced criticism for its lack of explicitness regarding directors' responsibilities towards all stakeholders, its adaptability is arguably one of its most significant assets. Directors are required to make all decisions with the company's best interests in mind. The specifics of these decisions, including what they are and how they are implemented, are rightfully left to the directors, who possess the necessary business acumen and expertise. It is crucial that the duties of directors retain their flexibility over time, allowing them to adapt in response to shifts in societal expectations and values.