100% tevredenheidsgarantie Direct beschikbaar na je betaling Lees online óf als PDF Geen vaste maandelijkse kosten
logo-home
Eerder door jou gezocht
Eerder door jou gezocht
logo
Exam (elaborations) company law $7.99
In winkelwagen
Snel navigeren naar
Voorbeeld
  2.  
  3. Kings College London (KCL)
  4.  
  5. Company law

Tentamen (uitwerkingen)

Exam (elaborations) company law

 0 keer verkocht
  • Vak
  • Company law
  • Instelling
  • Kings College London (KCL)

This is the complete a - z note on the company law topic, you just have to go through it once and you can easily attempt the question and get A ++ grade in finals this is a marked answer by a senior professor you just need to read it and you can even write the same just need to change it a bit ...

[Meer zien]

Voorbeeld 2 van de 6  pagina's

Document informatie

  • 1 maart 2023
  • 6
  • 2022/2023
  • Tentamen (uitwerkingen)
  • Vragen en antwoorden

Onderwerpen

  • company law

Geschreven voor

  • Kings College London (KCL)
  • Onbekend
  • Company law
Alle documenten voor dit vak (36)

Verkoper

avatar-seller
zainubgillani

Voorbeeld van de inhoud

2018 Zone A Question #5

Astralzone Ltd has four directors, Beatrice, Clarissa, Delia and Earnest. Geraldine owns 51% of
the company’s shares. In December 2017, the board awards Beatrice a five-year employment
contract. In January 2018, Geraldine discovers this. Geraldine also decides that Beatrice is not
working hard enough, and passes a resolution at a shareholders’ meeting to remove Beatrice as
a director. The board agrees to pay Beatrice £300,000 for the premature termination of her
five-year contract.In February 2018,

Clarissa is given a car by John, one of Astralzone’s suppliers. John tells Clarissa the gift is to
thank Clarissa for having persuaded the board of Astralzone to award John a lucrative contract

In March 2018, Delia decides she is going to set up her own business, in competition with
Astralzone. She approaches customers of Astralzone and tells them of her plans. She does not
tell the whole boardof her plans, but does tell Clarissa. Clarissa takes no action.

In April 2018, the directors decide to sell a building owned by Astralzone, to Francis, Earnest’s
son. The price is £101,000. It appears the building was worth far more than that. Advise
Geraldine whether Astralzone could take any action in respect ofthe foregoing events



The question requires a discussion on the rights and liabilities that Astralzone may have with
respect to each of its directors. The majority Shareholder Geraldine (51%) is to be advised
whilst looking at each director separately;

Beatrice:

The circumstances of Beatrice illustrate two possible issues;

firstly with regards to termination of her 5 year service contract after just 1 month by the
majority shareholder Geraldine -- secondly the heavy payment of £300,000 for premature
termination by board.

 The Law requires a director service contract (S.227) of more than 2 years to have
Shareholder approval in order to prevent entrenchment (s.188 and s.189) (UK Safety Group
v Heane). The FACT DON’T SHOW SHARHOLDER APPROVAL any such information,
presuming that a Shareholder APPROVA NOT PRESENT was not given, the contract would
be considered invalid. Presuming that a Shareholder APPROVAL GIVEN has been given
(S.168), S.188 holds that a Service contract can be terminated upon reasonable notice
(Bushell v Faith).

 Service contracts are governed by S.227 of CA 2006. Geraldine is advised that what she
would want to do may have the following consequences; The board usually gives long

, service contracts because the longer the duration of contract, the more the damages will
be awarded

 in case of pre mature termination to get rid of directors and so upon premature
termination, even though the law is complied with since S.168 holds that Shareholders
have power to remove directors by passing an ordinary resolution for whatever reason
they want, there would still be breach (Southern Foundries).

As a result, the director would be entitled to damages for premature termination. It is
arguable that the payment of compensation was approved because they failed to appreciate
that the contract was terminable on reasonable notice and warded her more compensation
than she was entitled to (£300,000).

This decision to pay an excessive amount may equate to breach of director duties and the rest
of board could have possibly acted in breach of their director duties (S.174), exercise of
reasonable care, skill and diligence. A mistake can be attributed to them for being negligent
with the term given (5 years) and then awarding such high compensation.

 In case this was done maliciously and they had knowledge, S.172 will apply (duty to
promote success of Company) (Re Smith v Fawcett). It will be assessed whether she acted
in good faith in paying such excessive payment for premature termination on working for
only one month and was this in the best interest for the Company’s success (S.215-220
CA2006)

 . S.217 holds that proposed payments in terms of termination must be disclosed and
approved by Shareholders however there is no need for approval in case of payments being
made in good faith. To assess whether the payment was made in good faith, four
conditions must be satisfied; there must be existing legal obligation, damages, settlement
and permission. There was a legal obligation since premature termination and there seems
to be no suggestion of malice or bad faith.



Delia

Setting up another business, she might be contravening S.175; duty to avoid conflicts of interest
(Real Hastings) ( DIRECTOR ACTING IN GOOD FAUITH BUT HELD LAIBLE( ( PESO _. Boardman v
Phipps holds that possibility of conflict is sufficient grounds for breach (1). Lord Herschell in
Brzay v Ford held; “…a person in a fiduciary posis8tion…is not allowed to put himself in a
position where his interest and duty conflict.”Courts hold that once a director has decided to
set up an independent business which is in cmpetition directly (Cook v Deeks,, D WERE

Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!

In een paar klikken geregeld

In een paar klikken geregeld

Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of je Stuvia-tegoed en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.

Direct to-the-point

Direct to-the-point

Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!

Veelgestelde vragen

Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?

Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.

Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?

Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.

Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?

Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper zainubgillani. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.

Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?

Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor $7.99. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.

Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?

4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 65004 samenvattingen verkocht

Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen

Begin nu gratis

Laatst bekeken door jou

Tentamen (uitwerkingen) ·

(0)

Biology 8e Raven Chapter 1 Questions and Answers Graded A+ 2024 Reviewed

Voordeelbundel ·

(0)

Bundel Omgevingscriminologie

Tentamen (uitwerkingen) ·

(0)

HSM 542 Week 8 Final Exam Questions and Answer elaborations | 100% CORRECT | DeVry University

Samenvatting ·

(1)

samenvatting senation and perception deeltt 1

Case uitwerking ·

(0)

NR 510 Week 3 Organizational Behavior and Business Influences and Advanced Practice Nursing

$7.99
  • (0)
In winkelwagen
Toegevoegd