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.

decisions. 150 <strong>The</strong>refore, directors must maintain supervision and monitor the<br />

company‟s status, and, if necessary, review plans and decisions they have made.<br />

Directors whose company is having financial difficulties may decide to subject it<br />

to formal insolvency proceedings. <strong>The</strong> Cork Committee had recommended<br />

actions such as liquidation, receivership or administration be taken by directors<br />

whose company was facing financial problems. 151 Unlike the Australian insolvent<br />

trading provisions, 152 section 214(3) does not specifically cite formal insolvency<br />

proceedings as one <strong>of</strong> the factors for the courts to take into account when<br />

deciding whether a director has succeeded in his defence. In spite <strong>of</strong> that, in Re<br />

Farmizer (Products) Ltd 153 a liquidator only seeks contributions for the alleged<br />

wrongful trading up until the date the administration order was made. This gives<br />

the indication that directors who opted for formal insolvency proceedings may be<br />

able to limit their liability if not be totally absolved from it.<br />

Likewise in Australia, there is no guarantee that a director who puts a company<br />

under administration proceedings will be free from liability; it depends on the<br />

time and result <strong>of</strong> such action. Due to the specific provision in the statute, 154 the<br />

court in Australia is obliged to take the matter into consideration, while in the UK<br />

it is left to the discretion <strong>of</strong> the court.<br />

Insolvency law has always been in favour <strong>of</strong> rescuing and reorganisation <strong>of</strong> the<br />

company with winding up as the last option. <strong>The</strong> Cork Committee in its report<br />

has highlighted that one <strong>of</strong> the benefits <strong>of</strong> floating charge is the ability <strong>of</strong> its<br />

holder to appoint a receiver and manager. He or she is given extensive powers to<br />

manage the business <strong>of</strong> the company and in some circumstances may be able to<br />

150 Oditah above n52 at 208-209.<br />

151 Cork Report above n5 at [501].<br />

152 See section 588H(9) <strong>of</strong> the Australian Corporations Act 2001- „In determining whether a<br />

defence under subsection (5) has been proved, the matters to which regard is to be had include,<br />

but are not limited to:<br />

(a) any action the person took with a view to appointing an administrator <strong>of</strong> the company; and<br />

(b) when that action was taken; and<br />

(c ) the results <strong>of</strong> that action.‟<br />

153 [1997] 1 BCLC 589.<br />

154 See section 588H(9) <strong>of</strong> the Australian Corporations Act 2001.<br />

263

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!