Directors In A Company Case Study

2322 Words5 Pages

The Role of the Directors in a Company is of a paramount importance in the discourse of the proper running of the company. Directors are the spirit of the company .The company is merely a legal entity, governed by its directors. These directors have certain duties and responsibilities. These are mainly governed by the Corporation Act, 2001. Section 198A (1) of The Corporations Act, 2001(The Corporations Act 2001 s 198A (1)), clearly states that, ‘The business of a company is to be managed by or under the direction of the directors’. In the present case, the company (LP) has six individuals on the board of directors (Andy, Brian, Chris, David, Evan and Faith). All these directors, particularly Andy, felt that it would be prudent to restructure …show more content…

Board of Directors) is expected to do an extensive research before taking such an important decision, which Andy clearly did not. Hence, Andy does have a liability under section 180(1) of the Corporations Act, since he did not take did not act with due care or diligence, which he was supposed to, being on the board of directors of the company. Further, (In Re Brazilian Rubber Plantations and Estates Ltd (1911) 1 Ch 425 at 437) Justice Neville said of a director of a company that- ‘He is not, I think, bound to take any definite part in the conduct of the company’s business, but so far as he does undertake it he must use reasonable care in its dispatch. Such reasonable care must, I think, be measured by the care an ordinary man might be expected to take in the same circumstances on his own behalf.’ In the case of (Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Healey (2011) FCA 717), it was held that, Each and every director has a cardinal role in the management of the company and is positioned at the top of the structure of the organisation. It is also a set law that the higher the position held by a person in an organisation the greater would be the responsibility on

Show More
Related

  • ASIC V. Rich 2009: NSWSC 1229

    1000 Words  | 2 Pages

    This decision was made in good faith and cannot be conspicuously construed to have self-interests veiled in them. Further, the executive directors made an informed decision to refrain from passing this information to the board and they did believe that this would be in the best interests of the company as disclosure would have brought an end to the company’s existence much before the actual downfall. Thus this judgment met all the requisites prescribed under the provisions of Section 180 (2) of the Corporations Act, 2001 (Rawhouser, Cummings and Crane 2015). This case was the first to comprehensively lay down the business judgment defense and apply it to the facts and circumstances of a case. This defense would negate the apparent breach of the duties of the directors as prescribed by the statute and under common

    Read More

  • 1

    677 Words  | 2 Pages

    Ralph Nader, Mark Green and Joel Seligman, in an excerpt from Taming the Giant Corporation (1976, found in Honest Work by Ciulla, Martin and Solomon), take the current role of the company board of directors and suggest changes that should be made to make the board to be efficient. They claim the current makeup of the board does not necessarily do justice to the company because “in nearly every large American business…there exists a management autocracy” (Nader, Green and Seligman, 1976, p.570). The main resolution they present is to make the board more democratic with the betterment of the company as its first priority. Currently the board no longer oversees operations, or elects top company executives and they are no longer involved in the business operations to the extent they should be. Nadar, Green and Seligman argue that that all of these things need to be changed. For a corporation so large to be successful there must be separation of powers just as there is in any current government system ( p.571). They claim this is the only and best way to success (Nader, Green and Seligman, 1976, p.570-571).

    Read More

  • Corporate Responsibilities

    1045 Words  | 3 Pages

    The corporation’s business is carried out by its management, under the direction of the Board of Directors. The Board, and each committee of the Board, has complete access to management. Also, the Board and committee member’s has access to independent advisors as each considers necessary or appropriate. Mallor, Barnes, Bowers, & Langvardt (2010) state that the Board of Directors also, issues shares, Adopts articles of merger or sha...

    Read More

  • Al Dunlap At Sunbeam

    1750 Words  | 4 Pages

    This is actually an example of mixed corporate governance. There are independent board members in order to make sure that the operational and financial health of the company can gauged accurately from time to time. Peter Langerman did an in depth enquiry into the financial matters just because Dunlap had offered to resign in response to a trivial question. The board should have kept a watch on the firm’s financial health from the beginning. But after realising the gravity of situation, board was prompt and unanimous in firing Albert Dunlap which shows good corporate governance.

    Read More

  • Sardar Biglari: Recommendation Shareholders Of Cracker Barrel

    808 Words  | 2 Pages

    First, forming an audit committee to reinforce a high road accounting measure. Segment wise reports for restaurant and retail operations are recommended. Second, establishing a compensation committee to review CEO goals, evaluate performance and determine compensations. Current executive compensation plan was based on 1994 standard and need update. Third, the threshold of poison pill should be raised to 20%. The 10% trigger might restrict investors without hostile intent in ISS’s perspective. However, activating poison pill is not recommended. At last, a nomination committee should be established to nominate independent directors. This committee would also recommend appropriate service tenure for independent board

    Read More

  • Tenant Council Case Study Summary

    1582 Words  | 4 Pages

    This case study then outlines the governing body with 14 individuals including the executive directors, five senior managers,

    Read More

  • The Albazero Case Study

    892 Words  | 2 Pages

    According to Corporation Act 2001 s124(1), it illustrates that ‘’A company has the legal capacity and powers of an individual both in and outside the jurisdiction” . As it were, company as a legal individual must be freely with all its capital contribution shall embrace liability for its legal actions and obligations of the company’s shareholders is limited to its investment to the company. This ‘separate legal entity’ principle was established in the case of Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd [1987] as company was held to have conducted the business as a legal person and separate from its members. It demonstrated that the debt of company is belonged to the company but not to the shareholders. Shareholders have only right to participate in managing but not in sharing the company property. Besides ,the Macaura v Northern Assurance Co Ltd [1925] demonstrates that the distinction between the shareholders and company assets. It means that even Mr Macaura owned almost all the shares in the company, he had no insurable interest in the company’s asset. The other recent case is the Lee v Lee’s Air Farming Ltd [1961] which illustrates that the distinct legal entities between employee ad director allows Mr.Lee function in dual capacities. It resulted that the corporation can contract with the controlling member of the corporation.

    Read More

  • Case Study Of Nortel

    2228 Words  | 5 Pages

    There had been 12 members on their board which compared to other firms was large. Having too many members on a board may cause disagreements of the company’s ethics. The more people in a room running a company may have many opinions and suggestions for which route the company should move to. All these members of an independent board are responsible in monitoring the finances of a firm. A member’s action sequence may motivate other board members in persuading them on the direction they want the firm to go. With so many people on a board laziness may take in effect and expect others to do the wor...

    Read More

  • Mark & Spencer and Corporate Governance

    1426 Words  | 3 Pages

    Corporate gorverance as a system are directed and controlld by companies. Initially, their board of directors should take responsible for the gorverance of companies, which include setting strategic aims of companies , guarantee an effective leadership, supervising the proformance of business management and reporting on it to shareholders. The board's action should comply with the law, regulations and shareholders. In addition, the shareholders also play an important role in gorverance and they have right to decide who can be employed as the companies' directors and auditors to provide good governance structure for them. Therefore, corporate goverance can be regarded as what the board of a company does and how it sets the values of the company.

    Read More

  • Board of Directors' role in the US and UK

    1368 Words  | 3 Pages

    There are many similarities and differences in the way that companies, in both the United States and the United Kingdom, are owned and operated. One of the main issues to look at between companies in these two countries is the roles and responsibilities of their board of directors. The board of directors of any business plays a crucial role in the success of the company. Although there are many similarities in the board of directors in these two countries, a few key differences can change the aspect of the company’s oversight.

    Read More

  • ASIC Vs. Cassimatis: Breach Of Care And Diligence

    1814 Words  | 4 Pages

    Case Introduction 2 The breach of duties by directors 2 Case Analysis 4 Directors’ duty of care and its scope 4 Test for the breach of care and diligence 4 Impacts on Australian corporation law 5 Conclusion 6 References 6 Case Introduction The aim of this report is to research on the case ASIC v Cassimatis (No. 8) [2016] FCA 1023 involving breach of company directors’ duties under the Corporations Act 2001 (CA).

    Read More

  • Fiduciary Duty: Valuation Of Johnny's Company Television Inc.

    372 Words  | 1 Pages

    In most instances, courts would consider the “business judgement rule” when making a ruling. The Business Judgement Rule relieves corporate management from liability for actions that are undertaken in good faith. When management or directors make honest, informed

    Read More

  • Company Law

    2007 Words  | 5 Pages

    As a consequence of the separate legal entity and limited liability doctrines within the UK’s unitary based system, company law had to develop responses to the ‘agency costs’ that arose. The central response is directors’ duties; these are owed by the directors to the company and operate as a counterbalance to the vast scope of powers given to the board. The benefit of the unitary board system is reflected in the efficiency gains it brings, however the disadvantage is clear, the directors may act to further their own interests to the detriment of the company. It is evident within executive remuneration that directors are placed in a stark conflict of interest position in that they may disproportionately reward themselves. The counterbalance to this concern is S175 Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) this acts to prevent certain conflicts arising and punishes directors who find themselves in this position. Furthermore, there are specific provisions within the CA 2006 that empower third parties such as shareholders to influence directors’ remuneration.

    Read More

  • Derivative Claims Case Analysis

    518 Words  | 2 Pages

    Under corporate business law, stockholders are the owners of the corporation. But, considering the complexities of the daily operations of the corporation, each stockholder may not be given an authority to control its operation. Instead, they appoint directors among them, who likewise appoint officers or executives to manage the corporation.

    Read More

  • Business Judgement Rule

    830 Words  | 2 Pages

    Australia like the U.S states that members of the executive board have a duty of care to their companies. If misbehavior or the belief of misconduct occurred in a company, it can be brought to court by a shareholder or, more commonly, a group of shareholders. The business judgment rule is used to review these cases to determine whether people can litigate a lawsuit. If they do, the board will be responsible for the decisions they made and ask them to be kept to demonstrate their reasoning. Nonetheless, the major difference between the U.S and Australian Judgement Rule is that if the company presents just one evidence, even though, the director or corporate officer has more evidence on his/ her side, court can rule in favor of the company. Consequently, the director, will have to sign a “private contract” to make his mistake a personal debt. If, he does not have enough money to pay his/her mistake, he will work for a reasonable time to pay back the losses caused by his bad decision. Subsequently, after all this process, the corporate officer may go to prison depending of the degree of its

    Read More

More about Directors In A Company Case Study

Open Document