Preview

Directors Duties

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
623 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Directors Duties
Fiduciary Duties of Directors
1) Duty to act in good faith in the interests of the company
In Re W & M Roith Ltd [1967] 1 All ER 427, the controlling director of a company had given many years services without having a service contract. He was then given a service agreement providing for payment of a pension to his widow if he died while still a director. He was already in poor health at this time and he died two months later. The pension was paid for several years and then the company went into liquidation. The director’s executors put in a claim in the liquidation for the capitalized value of the pension. The liquidator rejected the claim. It was held that the claim could not be supported. The pension was not for the benefit of the company, nor incidental to the carrying on of the company’s business.

2) Duty to exercise powers for proper purpose
In Howard Smith Ltd v Ampol Petroleum Ltd [1974] AC821, Ampol Petroleum and Bulkships Ltd together owned 55% of the issued share capital of R W Miller (Holdings) Ltd. Ampol and Howard Smith Ltd were making competing takeover bids for Miller. The directors of Miller favored Howard Smith’s bid, which was higher, but there was no prospect of this bid succeeding because Ampol and Bulkships would not have accepted Howard Smith’s offer. The evidence showed that Miller was in need of further capital. The directors of Miller resolved to allot new shares to Howard Smith for two purposes; first, to raise the capital needed, and secondly to reduce the holdings of Ampol and Bulkships to enable Howard Smith’s bid succeed. Ampol challenged the validity of the allotment. It was held that the allotment was not valid. Its dominant purpose was to alter the balance of power, and this was not the purpose for which the director’s power to allot shares had been given.

3) Duty to avoid conflicts of duty and interest
In Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver [1942] 1 All ER 378, Regal owned one cinema and wanted to buy two others and sell all

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    HCC 40, PC 3: Court Case

    • 745 Words
    • 3 Pages

    .Issue : Did johnson has the right to buy the shares if the tendering four shareholders at book value…

    • 745 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    c. the right to share in the assets of the corporation upon dissolution before the claim of any other parties.…

    • 2589 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    TABL1710 Autosaved

    • 1915 Words
    • 8 Pages

    EMPIRNALL HOLDINGS PTY LTD V MACHON PAULL PARTNERS PTY LTD (acceptance not communicated through docs- but continuous REGULAR actions means acceptance)…

    • 1915 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Case Study: Hollis V Vabu

    • 2064 Words
    • 9 Pages

    o Colonial Mutual Life Assurance Society Ltd v Producers and Citizens Co-operative Assurance Co. of Australia Ltd (1919) 26 CLR 110…

    • 2064 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Best Essays

    * Victorian Stevedoring & General Contracting Co Pty Ltd & Meakes v Dignan (1931) 46 CLR 73.…

    • 2525 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Better Essays

    In the case, “FC of T v The Myer Emporium Ltd 87 ATC 4363”, the taxpayer “The Myer Emporium”, worked out a financial arrangement during 6-9 March 1981. Under the arrangement, it lent $80 million to its subsidiary, Myer Finance Ltd, at an interest rate of 12.5% pa. It also assigned its right to the interest (not to the principal) to Citicorp Canberra Pty Ltd for a lump sum in the order of $45 million. The commissioner treated the lump sum of $45 million received as an income receipt, assessable under s 25(1) of ITAA 1936 (Cth). The commissioner also contended that the amount received constituted a profit assessable under the second limb of s 26(a) as a profit arising from a profit-making scheme.1 Both the Victorian Supreme Court and the Full Federal Court decided in favor to Myer despite the fact the taxpayer had argued contrary to the Tax Office!s argument that the lump sum was merely realizing a capital asset because it was a gain from an isolated transaction outside the ordinary course of its retail and property development business. However, the High Court conferred its decision that the $45 million received by the Myer was assessable under s 25(1) as an income receipt and also under the second limb of s 26(a) as a profit from a profit-making under-taking or scheme2. On the facts in Myer, the High Court held that: “It is the fact that Myer!s business at all times was that of retailing and property developer. The income made by…

    • 1611 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Best Essays

    Unconscionability

    • 2687 Words
    • 11 Pages

    [ 6 ]. Cobbe v Yeoman 's Row Management Ltd [2008] 1 W.L.R. 1752 Lord Walker 92…

    • 2687 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    buzzle

    • 384 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Facts: This case concerned the collapse of a company that operated a number of retail stores that sold predominantly Apple products (authorised Apple resellers). The company (Buzzle) had been created as a result of numerous earlier companies merging their Apple reselling businesses into the new company. In order to achieve this Buzzle needed the approval of Apple to swap its existing supply contracts and credit contracts with the companies to new contracts with the merged entity Buzzle. At the time of the merger Buzzle represented a large percentage of Apple’s sales in Australia. Apple was therefore concerned about the viability of new merged entity’s business and made detailed requests to Buzzle before it would give approval. Apple’s Australian finance director (Likidis) had detailed negotiations with Buzzle management and maintained an office in Buzzle’s headquarters. When Buzzle collapsed into liquidation, the liquidator took action against Apple and Likidis on the basis that they were shadow directors and/or otherwise officers of Buzzle. If they were directors of Buzzle then it may have been possible for them to be liable for insolvent trading (s588G). If they were officers it would have been possible to avoid security that Apple had taken over Buzzle and its property (under prior s267-see now s588FP). The liquidator also sought to argue that Apple was party to uncommercial transactions under s588FB (this is outside the scope of this topic). The trial judge found that neither Apple nor Likidis were directors or officers of Buzzle.…

    • 384 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Charities-Trust Essay

    • 3706 Words
    • 15 Pages

    • Re Jackson, Midland Bank Executor and Trustee Co Ltd v Archbishop of Wales [1930] 2 Ch 389…

    • 3706 Words
    • 15 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Roles of a Director of a NFP

    • 3664 Words
    • 15 Pages

    Not for Profit Organizations and registered charities are run by board of directors that are voted in by members of an organization. These organizations are not owner operated. The board of directors for NFP’s and registered charities usually consists of individuals who are leaders or experienced professionals in their respective communities (Carters, 2011). No individual has the right to any residual earnings or share capital in these organizations. This report will discuss the roles of directors and how they must perform these roles by abiding to certain standards of care. This report will also discuss the liabilities directors could face for not ethically or responsibly fulfilling their roles.…

    • 3664 Words
    • 15 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    LAW BARTON V ARMSTRONG

    • 599 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Armstrong and Barton both worked in Landmark Corporation ltd. as the chairman and managing director respectively. Armstrong holding the majority shares in the public company. For an expanded period of time there had been a large amount of adversity between the parties. Armstrong’s belligerent behaviour resulted in Barton and two other directors becoming gravely discontent with his behaviour and his great mistreatment of several privileges. Also there was a belief that the company would become insolvent due to the manner in which Armstrong ran the business. The directors detached the credit facilities from the corporation. Once Armstrong discovered this he threatened Barton with death. Forcing Barton to buy Armstrong’s shares at an extensive overvalued price. Shortly after the corporation became insolvent.…

    • 599 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    Salomon V a Salomon

    • 2261 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Salomon v A Salomon and Co Ltd (Salomon) has created an impressive case in English Law history. The decision of the House of Lords in Salomon has reaffirmed the separate legal personality of a company. A separate legal personality is also known as the corporate personality. It is one of the consequences of the Company Act 2006 which incorporated a sole trader company to a limited company. When a company has undergone incorporation, it simply means that the shareholders of the company are separated from the company. Therefore, the shareholders have limited liability. In an incorporated company, shareholders get a benefit of having limited liability. The assets of the company do not belong to its members and the company can only sue or be sued under its own name only. On the other hand, there are particular circumstances whereby the court is trying to abstain the principle of separate legal personality and limited liability to pinpoint the fact behind incorporation – it is called “the lifting or corporate veil”. From my point of view, I strongly agree with the decision made by Lord Macnaghten in House of Lords in the Salomon case because he alleged a true and fair view on the case. Mr Salomon had successfully appealed to the House of Lords and Mr Salomon managed to acquire his rights, which is to obtain a separate legal personality; he was only liable to the amount of company debts on the shares that he owned. In this essay, the doctrine and incorporation of the case of Salamon v A Salomon and Co Ltd and the lifting of corporate veil is critically discussed.…

    • 2261 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    Company Law Essay

    • 1141 Words
    • 5 Pages

    This question involves the rights and duties of the members in their dealings with each other and with the company. The articles of association are the primary source of the provisions determining these internal relationships, and they will form the basis of this question and also be combined with aspects of directors' duties, variation of class rights and s459 of the Companies Act 1985. I will split the issues that arise in this question into two parts. The first part would be to deal with Sheila, and to establish whether she can prevent the alteration of the objects of the company. The second part would be to advise Damien and Donald on whether they have been unfairly prejudiced in their removal from the Board.…

    • 1141 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    As everybody know, to be responsible and accomplish with your duties, is one of the most important things around the world in the labor area. Without being responsible and do whatever you are supposed to do, practically, you are out of your job. As and future officer of the United States Army, we must know which ones are our duties and responsibilities in order to accomplish them and make our team look sharp and right. Due to constants changes in the army, we never know which position we or our fellow soldier are going to occupy. Thus, here you will see the duties and responsibilities of leadership positions from company commander to squad leader in order to make the reader understand why is so important to know what, when, where and why is your position so important.…

    • 834 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Article Reflection

    • 3620 Words
    • 15 Pages

    Section 131 of the Companies Act 1993 discusses the duty a director has, to act in good faith and in the best interests of the company.…

    • 3620 Words
    • 15 Pages
    Powerful Essays