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.

If the director in question has a higher standard <strong>of</strong> knowledge, skill and<br />

experience than ordinary reasonable directors, then he or she will be judged on<br />

the higher individual standard. However, the standard applicable to the director<br />

will be the reasonable standard if he or she possesses lower knowledge, skills and<br />

experience. This will ensure that the minimum standard <strong>of</strong> a reasonable director<br />

is maintained. This issue was discussed in the case <strong>of</strong> Re Produce Marketing<br />

Consortium Ltd (No 2). 138 <strong>The</strong> minimum standard <strong>of</strong> knowledge expected from a<br />

reasonable director occupying the same function varies depending on the size <strong>of</strong><br />

business and the nature <strong>of</strong> the business. 139<br />

<strong>The</strong> case provided that directors are deemed to have the necessary knowledge <strong>of</strong><br />

the information that ought to have been obvious to them had the company<br />

complied with the requirement <strong>of</strong> maintaining proper accounts. 140 Thus, in<br />

assessing directors‟ knowledge, the information should not be restricted to<br />

materials the directors have before them but also extend to those which should<br />

have been available to them.<br />

10.3.2.4 Defences<br />

<strong>The</strong> burden is on the liquidator to show at which point before the commencement<br />

<strong>of</strong> winding up that the director knew or ought to have concluded that there were<br />

no reasonable prospects <strong>of</strong> the company avoiding insolvent liquidation. 141 Once<br />

this has been proved, the burden shifts to the director to show that he has taken<br />

every step he ought to have taken. 142 <strong>The</strong> director must convince the court that<br />

138 [1989] BCLC 520.<br />

139 Re Produce Marketing Consortium Ltd (No 2) [1989] BCLC 520 at 550- Knox J stated that “ It<br />

follows that the general knowledge, skill and experience postulated will be much less extensive<br />

in a small company in a modest way <strong>of</strong> business, with simple accounting procedures and<br />

equipment, than it will be in a large company with sophisticated procedures.”<br />

140 [1989] BCLC 520 at 550.<br />

141 See section 214(2)(b) <strong>of</strong> the UK Insolvency Act 1986.<br />

142 See section 214(3) <strong>of</strong> the UK Insolvency Act 1986- „ <strong>The</strong> court shall not make a declaration<br />

under this section with respect to any person if it is satisfied that after the condition specified in<br />

subsection (2)(b) was first satisfied in relation to him that person took every step with a view to<br />

minimising the potential loss to the company‟s creditors as (assuming him to have known that<br />

260

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!