This report discusses the duties of directors under Section 171 of the Companies Act 2006, including the duty to act within powers and the duty to act for proper purposes. It also explores the consequences of breaching these duties and the legal remedies available to shareholders.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Duty to act within powers
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
Contents INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3 MAIN BODY..................................................................................................................................3 Section 171 Duty to act within powers........................................................................................3 Duty to act for proper purposes...................................................................................................3 Consequences of Breach-............................................................................................................4 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................5 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................6
INTRODUCTION This report highlights the issues of breaches of contract made under the Section 171 companies act 2006 and what are the duties of director in the company under this act. MAIN BODY The Companies Act 2006 classifies the role and duties of the directors of the company which is on the basis of code that is statutory. The sole purpose of this act was basic and that is to promote the success of the company. Some duties are defined for the committee of directors by the law. Before the act was introduced back in 2006 the guidelines, principles and the code of conduct was general, equal and permissible by the law. Introduction of this act has made the duties of a director clearly and what behavior is acceptable in the company. The Companies Act 2006 clearly states that if there is any breach of duty then the director of the company must be held liable for its failure (Amadi and Otuturu, 2018). Section 171 Duty to act within powers It is clearly guided to the directors of the company that the decisions taken by them and the work done by them must be as per the constitution of the company and on the basis of the guidelines imposed in Section 257 which is also considered as the articles of the company and they can be used for resolving a matter or forming an agreement. According to the guidelines those duties can be proceeded by the directors of the company ahead which are statutory. This will increase the chances of and put up more requirement on the directors. For instance- director of ABC company is required to pay£ 12,000 for goods but according to the protocols and guidelines set by the company he is allowed to make a transfer of up to £ 10,000 not more than that. If he pays more than that then it is the breach of the act Section 171. In some situations it is more complex for example if director of the company issues himself more shares than he is allowed to so that he can take decisions for the company will be considered as a breach of the act (Morley and Sitkoff, 2019). Duty to act for proper purposes In order to avoid circumstantial situation directors need to exercise their authoritative powers as per the constitution of the company and which is beneficial for the company. Director of the company is also known as agents who are fiduciary to the company. This puts a stop on
the director so that no misappropriate step has been taken by the director of the company which is not under the guidelines of the constitution. This rule gave is advantageous for shareholders and it gives a sense of security as they are allowed to put the directors of the company for trial in the court of law if they make decisions or takes steps which is not profitable for the company but only profitable to themselves. For example director of the company Hogg v Cramphorne tried to sabotage the process of bidding by allotting to some of the people who had the power to oppose the decision in the process. This was done in order to save a seat and their jobs in the board. When evidence was found the court rested their case by voiding those shares as it was done in the illegal manner (Welch and et.al., 2016). There are many other cases such as Stratford UK Properties LLC v Criterion Properties plc this case was different managing directors and the shareholders of the company had a mutual agreement to buy the shares at high price. This will put thee director in power and no one will be able to change the situation even if the board committee got changed. When the evidence was found the company fired the director and a case was filed in court in order to void the agreement because company was not aware of it and it was the wrongdoings of the director. Consequences of Breach- There are various consequences for the director who breaks the law and take decisions which are against the guidelines and outside the constitution of the company. The guidelines are set by the company with the help of the act so that any case of breach made by directors can be controlled with common law and principles. Section 171 is above the duties which are fiduciary for the company. Compensation for the losses or damages that the company has suffered because of the director is included under it. Also it restores the property of the company and any account which was made by the director for rescission of contract and profits which was not disclosed by the director. Other than this the act also helps the company to maintain a procedure which is statutory which gives authority to the members of the company that they have the power to file a lawsuit against the director on behalf of the company when they have the evidence that they have breach the trust, duty or contract. These claims made by the members are known as derivative actions. These improved claims which are derivative protects the interests of shareholders against the wrongdoing of directors (Kher and Chawla, 2017).
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
In order to avoid this company needs to change their process of work. Procedures and policies must be clearly defined in accordance with the decisions. This will help to keep the evidence that no action committed by the director of the company is wrong. CONCLUSION From the above studies it has been concluded that Section 171 of companies act 2006 classifies the duties of director and the consequences of the decisions which are not in the interest of the company.
REFERENCES Books and Journal Kher, N. and Chawla, V., 2017. ‘Corporate Powers as Powers Held in Trust’: A Jurisprudential Analysis.Business Law Review,38(5), pp.190-205. Welch, E.P., and et.al., 2016.Folk on the Delaware general corporation law: fundamentals. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. Morley, J.D. and Sitkoff, R.H., 2019. Making Directed Trusts Work: The Uniform Directed Trust Act.ACTEC LJ,44, p.3. Amadi, F.C. and Otuturu, G.G., 2018. Division of Powers Between Corporate Organs in Public Companies: A Comparative Perspective.JL Pol'y & Globalization,77, p.22.