14.01.2013 Views

View/Open - Research Commons - The University of Waikato

View/Open - Research Commons - The University of Waikato

View/Open - Research Commons - The University of Waikato

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

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

c) Creditors do not have direct right to take action against the company<br />

or directors in respect <strong>of</strong> any injury suffered by them. <strong>The</strong> proper<br />

plaintiff in this respect is the company. 72 This case illustrated the<br />

creditors‟ difficulties if the company refused to take action on behalf<br />

<strong>of</strong> the creditors. It also raises question <strong>of</strong> whether creditors should<br />

have a right to take action against directors directly, similar to a<br />

shareholder‟s derivative action. 73 Shareholders are given rights in the<br />

company due to the historical doctrine that they are perceived to be<br />

the owners, while creditors are the outsiders. 74 However, as explained<br />

before, due to the separate legal entity principle and dispersal <strong>of</strong><br />

ownership and control, there are no differences between shareholders<br />

and creditors today since shareholders‟ roles have been reduced to<br />

that <strong>of</strong> investors. 75 In addition, the emergence <strong>of</strong> stakeholders‟ theory<br />

which promotes the interests <strong>of</strong> every stakeholder in the company<br />

should be seen as an indication that each plays important roles in the<br />

success <strong>of</strong> the company.<br />

d) <strong>The</strong> court has rejected the claim by the company that directors had<br />

purchased the property with their own money as members <strong>of</strong> the<br />

public and stated that it was a travesty <strong>of</strong> facts. <strong>The</strong> same line <strong>of</strong><br />

judgment was also enunciated by the court in Regal (Hastings) Ltd v<br />

Gulliver. 76 Based on the decisions, directors can only purchase assets<br />

or property if the company is not interested in the transaction in the<br />

first place. If the company withdraws its interest in the assets because<br />

<strong>of</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> funds, directors are still subject to a fiduciary duty. In this<br />

72 See the case <strong>of</strong> Foss v Harbottle (1843) 2 Hare 461.<br />

73 <strong>The</strong> oppression remedy has been extended to include creditors in the Canadian Business<br />

Corporations Act and the Malaysian and Singapore Acts.<br />

74 Halpern, Trebilcock and Turnbull, above n32 at 135; Finch, “Security” above n9 at 641; Finch<br />

above n32 at87.<br />

75 Ireland above n38 at 47.<br />

76 [1942] 1 All ER 378.<br />

204

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!