03.01.2013 Views

Chapter 7 Directors' Duties - alastairhudson.com

Chapter 7 Directors' Duties - alastairhudson.com

Chapter 7 Directors' Duties - alastairhudson.com

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

personal profits: first, if he has authorization to do so, in line with s.175 of the CA 2006;<br />

secondly, if he has resigned from his employment before <strong>com</strong>mencing the activities which<br />

led to the profit; and, thirdly, if the director had no powers at all to act as a director in practice<br />

before then making those personal profits. Each of these approaches is taken in turn.<br />

First, the <strong>com</strong>plex question of the acquisition of authorization in relation to <strong>com</strong>panies.<br />

Before considering this question in detail, it is important to understand the subtle differences<br />

between <strong>com</strong>panies and trusts. A number of cases dealing with <strong>com</strong>panies have been<br />

considered already. More recent cases in <strong>com</strong>pany law have suggested that this corporate<br />

opportunity doctrine will be pursued so that a director may be absolved from liability for<br />

secret profits if the <strong>com</strong>pany is not intending to pursue the opportunity from which the<br />

director earned his profits. So, in Island Export Finance Ltd v Umunna, 132 the <strong>com</strong>pany had a<br />

contract with the government of Cameroon to supply the government with post boxes. Mr<br />

Umunna resigned from the <strong>com</strong>pany once the contract was <strong>com</strong>pleted, having worked on that<br />

contract and acquired a great deal of expertise in that particular activity. The <strong>com</strong>pany ceased<br />

pursuing this line of business and after his resignation Mr Umunna entered into a similar<br />

contract on his own behalf. The <strong>com</strong>pany sued him for the personal profits which he made for<br />

himself under this second contract. The court held that Mr Umunna‟s fiduciary obligations<br />

towards the <strong>com</strong>pany did not cease once he resigned from its employment. This makes sense:<br />

if it were not the case, then no fiduciary could ever be bound by their fiduciary office if they<br />

had the good sense to resign immediately before breaching their duties. However, in this<br />

instance, the court found that the <strong>com</strong>pany had not been seeking to develop this sort of<br />

business opportunity at the time Mr Umunna had done so and therefore he had not interfered<br />

with a corporate opportunity.<br />

Secondly, we should consider the position of directors who have resigned from their<br />

employment and who then seek to exploit an opportunity on their own account. In Balston v<br />

Headline Filters Ltd, 133 a director had resigned from a <strong>com</strong>pany and leased premises with a<br />

view to starting up in business on his own account before a client of the <strong>com</strong>pany approached<br />

him and asked him to work for the <strong>com</strong>pany. Falconer J held that there was no breach of duty<br />

in these circumstances because there was nothing wrong with a director leaving his<br />

employment and setting up in business on his own account and, furthermore, there had not<br />

been any maturing business opportunity in this case which the director had diverted to<br />

himself. Therefore, in <strong>com</strong>pany law, it has been held that <strong>com</strong>pany directors may, assuming<br />

nothing in their contracts to the contrary prohibiting such an action under contract law, resign<br />

from their posts and on the next day begin activities which would previously have been in<br />

breach of their fiduciary duties. 134 Although, a director may not, even after resigning from her<br />

post, use either the <strong>com</strong>pany‟s property or information which she had acquired while still a<br />

director of the <strong>com</strong>pany to generate personal profits. 135 Clearly, if such behaviour were<br />

132 [1986] BCC 460.<br />

133 [1990] FSR 385.<br />

134 CMS Dolphin v. Simonet [2001] 2 BCLC 704 (Lawrence Collins J); Quarter Master UK Ltd v. Pyke [2005] 1<br />

BCLC 245, 264 (Mr Paul Morgan QC) and British Midland Tool Ltd v. Midland International Tooling Ltd<br />

[2003] 2 BCLC 523 (Hart J).<br />

135 Ultraframe UK Ltd v Fielding [2005] EWHC 1638 (Ch), [2005] All ER (D) 397, per Lewison J.<br />

38

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!