Guidance given on what evidence should be admitted to affect the length of disqualification and conditions of Director’s disqualification.
A director’s duty to exercise his powers in the best interests of the company and to recognise the separate legal character of the company are essential attributes of fitness to be concerned in the management of a company. The duties are personal and inescapable. Lord Woolf MR: ‘A proper degree of delegation and division of responsibility is of course permissible, and often necessary, but total abrogation of responsibility is not. A board of directors must not permit one individual to dominate them and use them, as Mr Griffiths plainly did in this case. Mr Davis commented that the appellants’ contention (in their affidavits) that Mr Griffiths was the person who must carry the whole blame was itself a depressing failure, even then, to acknowledge the nature of a director’s responsibility. There is a good deal of force in that point.’
Citations:
Times 29-Dec-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 3013, [1998] 2 All ER 124
Links:
Statutes:
Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Goldberg, Mcavoy ChD 26-Nov-2003
The Secretary of State sought a disqualification order. The director argued that one shoul not be made in the absence of some breach of legal duty, some dishonesty should be shown.
Held: The answer was a mixture of fact and law. A breach of . .
Cited – Ultraframe (UK) Ltd v Fielding and others ChD 27-Jul-2005
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
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: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.143412
