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.

company later went into liquidation and the liquidator brought an action against the<br />

directors for breach <strong>of</strong> duty. In this case, it was clear that the creditors‟ interests were<br />

affected since the company went into liquidation. It is also clear at common law that<br />

when the company is insolvent, directors have a duty to consider the interests <strong>of</strong><br />

creditors. 81 Directors can also be charged under criminal breach <strong>of</strong> trust if they are<br />

found using the company‟s funds for their own purposes and not for the<br />

company‟s. 82<br />

Another example <strong>of</strong> directors acting in conflict <strong>of</strong> interests is when directors use the<br />

information available to them by virtue <strong>of</strong> being directors to take up corporate<br />

opportunities and deprive the company <strong>of</strong> the same opportunity. 83<br />

9.3.5 Duty <strong>of</strong> Care and Diligence and Skill<br />

Unlike the law on conflict <strong>of</strong> interest, the law in this area in the past has been very<br />

lenient in imposing a low standard <strong>of</strong> duty <strong>of</strong> care and skill on directors. <strong>The</strong> law on<br />

this aspect has taken the view that business involves risks and it may hamper<br />

commerce if directors are reluctant to take the risks for fear that they may be held<br />

liable for breach <strong>of</strong> duty. 84<br />

<strong>The</strong> traditional approach <strong>of</strong> the law in this area is that directors will be judged on the<br />

basis <strong>of</strong> what the ordinary person having characteristics similar to the directors in<br />

question might be expected to have acted on their own behalf. 85 <strong>The</strong>re has been a<br />

81 Walker v Wimborne (1976) 137 CLR 1.<br />

82 Tan Sri Tan Hian Tsin v PP [1979] 1 MLJ 73; Chang Lee Swee v PP [1985] 1 MLJ 75.<br />

83 <strong>The</strong> Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees <strong>of</strong> the Sabah Foundations & Ors v Datuk Syed Kechik bin Syed Mohammed<br />

& Anor [1999] 6 MLJ 497; see also the statutory duty under section 175 <strong>of</strong> the UK Companies Act<br />

2006; sections 182-184 <strong>of</strong> the Australian Corporations Act 2001; section 132(2) <strong>of</strong> the Malaysian<br />

Act 1965.<br />

84 Farrar above n35 at135.<br />

85 Re City Equitable Fire Insurance Co Ltd [1925] Ch 407.<br />

206

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!