Corporation Act

RUNNING HEAD: CORPORATION ACT
Corporation Act
Name of student
Name of the university
Author Note

1
CORPORATION ACT
Issue:
The primary concern regarding the given case is whether Tony Stark has breached any
duty as a Director of Marvel Universe Pty Ltd.
The second issue about the given case is that whether the answer would different if Tony
Stark has been leaving his position of directorship before forming Endgame Pty Ltd.
The third concern regarding the provided case is whether Tony Stark has breached any of
the Director duties as he was in the position of a Director in Iron Man Pty Ltd.
The last concern regarding the provided case is whether the Director’s duties placed by a
company discourage or encourage the activities of the corporate sector.
Rule:
The enforced law of Australia provides several obligations and duties on various
employed individuals those perform any duties in favour of an organisation or a company of
Australia. The character of an individual particularly depends on the particular individual in the
company.
Responsibilities of a Director:
The main focus of the panel is to reward or appoint the head of the company of the
organisation. The formulation of the policies are done by them, and also they approve the
business plan that helps in setting the goal of the company. They help in planning for the annual
budget of the organisation and decides for handling the basic essentials for the positive running
of the company (Sheehy & Feaver, 2014) . The directors also carry the task for thinking about
the task of the management, and they monitor the outcome of the specified business. This

2
CORPORATION ACT
statement can be supported by a case law of Howard Smith vs Ampol Petroleum Ltd UKPC 3,
AC 821, 1 NSWLR 68
Liability of good faith:
Directors must utilise their power, control and similarly they should carry out their duties
and responsibilities with the better interest and along with noble or decent faith for the
organisation wholly. The actual target of the duty of the director is to carry out their task in the
form of honest manner for running the business successfully as the panel believes. Additionally
the manner of director’s behaviour can be judged objectively regarding reference to be known as
a good director considering the good interest of the organization (Farrar, 2011). This statement
can be held by a case law of Greenhalgh vs Arderne Cinemas 1 All ER 512, Ch 286.
Acting with diligence and care:
The basic manner of behaviour that is required for performing a duty depends on the situation of
the company that also comprises the duty and position of the certain director. Any of the director
that comprises of administrative director should have distinct knowledge and skill for gaining the
highest standard. The board of Directors must utilise their control and power, and similarly they
should perform out their task with proper roles and responsibilities including care and also
diligence that a decent person focuses for, if they are chosen to act as a board of the directors or
panel under the conditional evidence (Keay,. 2014). Similarly if they carry out the task the same
as the role of a board of directors accompanying the same company or organisation. The
director's behaviour should not be considered due to a lack of experience and skill. Every
director should carry out a meeting themselves for achieving the objective at their lowest
requirement. Section 180 along with section 181 of the CA 2001 explains the duties of the
directors to act in a caring and diligent way, and s 181 explains the duty of a director to act with