a) Legal terms and their meanings relevant to the case
Companies Act reflects a variety of business structure and each with a different legal structure of the formation of the company operating any problems. In Australia, all companies are subjected to the regulation under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), which is by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), and give the court for enforcement. This case falls into the area of corporation law and it is whether Shafron breached the duties of directors.
b) The major legal issues
The directors and officers liability attributed to the company as a whole. The duties of directors is not only shareholders, but also other stakeholders.
All directors and officers of statutory duties are fiduciary duties, including:
• The best interests of a duty of good faith in the company
• Duty to act in the proper use
• Duties in order to avoid any conflict of interest
The directors do not abuse their position and power, engage in activities, in particular, to avoid any conflict of interest is an important responsibility.
• Split the company's business opportunities and use them for personal gain
• the company's assets for private purposes
• Ensure that the secret profits …show more content…
As for the case of ASIC v Adler (2002), Alder is a director of companies. The transfer of 10 million dollars from HIHC to PPE as investment in AEUT which he as a director and then buy the same AEUT of HIH shares. When the $ 100,000 payment was made, it will not come to the attention of other directors of HIH. Overall, his performance caused HIHC serious losses. Court decision, alder disqualified form the company for 20 years and fined and pay damages HIHC and other directors. Under s 181(1) (b) , Common law is relevant circumstances also like Mills v Mills
Companies Act reflects a variety of business structure and each with a different legal structure of the formation of the company operating any problems. In Australia, all companies are subjected to the regulation under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), which is by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), and give the court for enforcement. This case falls into the area of corporation law and it is whether Shafron breached the duties of directors.
b) The major legal issues
The directors and officers liability attributed to the company as a whole. The duties of directors is not only shareholders, but also other stakeholders.
All directors and officers of statutory duties are fiduciary duties, including:
• The best interests of a duty of good faith in the company
• Duty to act in the proper use
• Duties in order to avoid any conflict of interest
The directors do not abuse their position and power, engage in activities, in particular, to avoid any conflict of interest is an important responsibility.
• Split the company's business opportunities and use them for personal gain
• the company's assets for private purposes
• Ensure that the secret profits …show more content…
As for the case of ASIC v Adler (2002), Alder is a director of companies. The transfer of 10 million dollars from HIHC to PPE as investment in AEUT which he as a director and then buy the same AEUT of HIH shares. When the $ 100,000 payment was made, it will not come to the attention of other directors of HIH. Overall, his performance caused HIHC serious losses. Court decision, alder disqualified form the company for 20 years and fined and pay damages HIHC and other directors. Under s 181(1) (b) , Common law is relevant circumstances also like Mills v Mills