Timothy Lloyd J summarised the authorities on the standard of misbehaviour to be shown to found disqualification of a company director and said: ‘ In order to disqualify a respondent the court has to be satisfied that he or she ‘has fallen below the standards of probity and competence appropriate for persons fit to be directors of companies’ . . This is a minimum standard . . It is also appropriate to recall that the purpose of the legislation is to improve the standard of conduct of company directors . . The point of a disqualification order is, by depriving the respondent of the liberty to take part in the management of a business carried on with the privilege of limited liability, to protect the public both from misconduct of a business by that director and also by a deterrent effect in relation to other company directors. . A consistent theme in the cases under the Act is that, while the Court must consider the extent of a respondent’s responsibility . . a director cannot avoid his responsibility by leaving the management to another or others.’
Judges:
Timothy Lloyd J
Citations:
Unreported, 15/06/1998
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform v Sullman and Another ChD 19-Dec-2008
An application was made to disqualify as a company director a former director of Claims Direct Limited. He had been accused of several actions which might justify a disqualification.
Held: The court found misconduct but delayed a decision on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Company
Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.279040