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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

no reasonable prospect that the company would avoid going into<br />

insolvent liquidation; and<br />

c) That person was a director <strong>of</strong> the company at the time.<br />

10.3.2.1 Applicability <strong>of</strong> the section - who will be liable?<br />

Section 214 imposes liability on directors who know, or ought to have concluded,<br />

that the company would be in insolvent liquidation. <strong>The</strong> section does not require<br />

that the directors be involved in trading, unlike section 213 which requires the<br />

person to take some positive steps in carrying on the business before liability can<br />

be imposed. 123 Directors who may be liable under the section include shadow<br />

directors. 124<br />

A shadow director is defined in section 251(1) <strong>of</strong> the UK Companies Act 2006 as<br />

"a person in accordance with those instructions the directors <strong>of</strong> the company are<br />

accustomed to act." However, section 251(2) excludes a person who gives advice<br />

in his pr<strong>of</strong>essional capacity to directors who then acted on the advice, as a<br />

shadow director. 125 From this definition, it will exclude solicitors, accountants<br />

and auditors, whose advice is <strong>of</strong>ten sought by directors, from liability under<br />

section 214. <strong>The</strong>se pr<strong>of</strong>essionals are excluded in order to ensure advice is freely<br />

given without fear <strong>of</strong> any liability. Otherwise, they may advise the company not<br />

to proceed with trading though it is very likely to generate pr<strong>of</strong>it and it may cost<br />

creditors the chance <strong>of</strong> being repaid.<br />

<strong>The</strong> position, however, is not clear whether a parent company can be held to be a<br />

shadow director <strong>of</strong> its subsidiary. <strong>The</strong> law does not impose any statutory liability<br />

on the parent company for the debt <strong>of</strong> the company. Reliance continues to be on<br />

the court‟s discretion to lift the veil as and when it becomes necessary, in contrast<br />

123 See Re Maidstone Buildings Provisions Ltd [1971] 3 All ER 363.<br />

124 See section 214(7) <strong>of</strong> the UK Insolvency Act 1986- “In this section 'directors‟ includes a<br />

shadow director”.<br />

125 Section 251(2) <strong>of</strong> the UK Companies Act 2006- “A person is not to be regarded as a shadow<br />

director by reason only that the directors act on advice given by him in a pr<strong>of</strong>essional capacity”.<br />

<strong>The</strong> same definition also contained in section 251 <strong>of</strong> the Insolvency Act 1986.<br />

256

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!