Business and Corporate Law: Assignment

10 Pages2310 Words208 Views

Added on 2020-05-16

Business and Corporate Law: Assignment

Added on 2020-05-16

BookmarkRelated Documents

Running head: BUSINESS AND CORPORATE LAWBusiness and Corporate LawName of the StudentName of the UniversityAuthor Note

Business and Corporate Law: Assignment_1

1BUSINESS AND CORPORATE LAWTable of ContentsIntroduction......................................................................................................................................2The Responsibilities or Duties Breached.........................................................................................2Analysis of the case.........................................................................................................................5The relevance of the decision to the development of Australian Corporation Law........................8Reference.......................................................................................................................................10

Business and Corporate Law: Assignment_2

2BUSINESS AND CORPORATE LAWASIC v Australian Property Custodian Holdings Limited (NO 3)[2013]FCA 1342IntroductionASIC v Australian Property Custodian Holdings Limited (NO 3)[2013] is one of thesignificant cases of the Federal Court of Australia where the organization has been breached theterms of the Corporation Act 2001(Cth). Australian Securities and Investments Commission(ASIC) is the plaintiff in this case and defendants are Australian Property Custodian HoldingsLimited (ACN 095 474 436), Dr. Michael Richard Lewis Wooldridge, Mr. Mark FrederickButler, Mr. William Lionel Lewski, Mr. Kim Jaques, and Mr. Peter Clarke.ASIC has claimed several allegations against the six defendants that they have beenbreached the CA. The ASIC has been mentioned that the defendant has contravened theirresponsibilities towards the managed investment scheme under the Part 5C of the act accordingto the section 601FC. According to the section 601FB, the directors of the company are bound toexercise their duties as officers of the responsible entity. This section has been helped to preventthe related party transaction for the responsible entity where the members get their approval inagainst of the section 208 of CA. However, due to such issues, ASIC has been complainedagainst the five former directors and court has been ordered pecuniary penalties for such offencesin the managing corporation. The Responsibilities or Duties Breached The fact of the case is Australian property custodian Holdings Limited (Receivers andmanagers in Liquidation Controllers) who is the first defendant has been found with theResponsible Entity of the Managed Investment Scheme in the Aged Care property and Trust or

Business and Corporate Law: Assignment_3

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Business Law Assignment: Breach of Duties

|11

|2533

|48

Corporate Law Assignment Sample

|2304

|111

Lewski v ASIC (No 2) [2017] FCAFC 171 - Analysis of Breach of Duties by Directors under Corporation Act 2001

|13

|861

|210

Business & Corporation Law Assignment

|11

|2540

|40

Lewski v ASIC (No 2) [2017] FCAFC 171 - Analysis and Impact on Australian Corporations Law

|2488

|181

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Andrew Alexander Lindberg Case Analysis

|2252

|386

Business and Corporate Law: Assignment