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.

to the director to prove that he or she has a defence or defences to exonerate them<br />

from liability. <strong>The</strong> standard <strong>of</strong> pro<strong>of</strong> is a civil standard balance <strong>of</strong> probability.<br />

10.2.7 Standard <strong>of</strong> Liability<br />

<strong>The</strong> standard <strong>of</strong> liability applicable in reckless trading is an objective test;<br />

focusing on the manner in which the business is carried on and whether it would<br />

create a substantial risk <strong>of</strong> serious loss. 43 Unlike the UK and Australian<br />

legislation, there is no element <strong>of</strong> subjectivity mentioned in section 135 <strong>of</strong> the<br />

New Zealand Companies Act 1993. Section 136 <strong>of</strong> the New Zealand Companies<br />

Act 1993, on the other hand, uses both the subjective and objective elements.<br />

<strong>The</strong>re is a possibility that reliance solely on an objective element would result in<br />

the court substituting its own perspective or hindsight on the matter. 44 In most<br />

cases, the courts have relied on the evidence given by pr<strong>of</strong>essional practitioners<br />

in a reconstruction <strong>of</strong> the company‟s financial position, and what he or she would<br />

have done in those circumstances. 45 <strong>The</strong> approach <strong>of</strong> the courts in New Zealand<br />

differs from that <strong>of</strong> the UK, for in the UK the courts have been cautioned not to<br />

use hindsight in making decisions, but instead to base their decision on the<br />

evidence available to directors at the time. 46<br />

However, by setting an objective standard on liability, directors are compelled to<br />

equip themselves with a minimum standard. It imposes a duty on directors to<br />

guide and monitor the company since the company‟s financial position is central<br />

to liability under the section. Directors therefore cannot leave the management <strong>of</strong><br />

the company to a third party because it is important that they form their own<br />

opinion as to the company‟s position. Directors are compelled to be vigilant in<br />

exercising their duty and this could benefit the company as a whole.<br />

43 Mason v Lewis [2006] 3 NZLR 225 at 234; see also Fatupaito v Bates [2001] 3 NZLR 386.<br />

44 Keay above n2 at 114.<br />

45 Ibid.<br />

46 See Re Sherborne Associates Ltd [1995] BCC 40.<br />

237

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!