Knowledge (XXG)

Interest of the company

Source 📝

134:, requires that directors have to consider the impact of their actions on a much wider range of stakeholders. The Act requires a director "to promote the success of the company for the benefit of its members as a whole", but sets out six factors to which a director must have regards in fulfilling the duty to promote success. These are: 282:
For example, section 309 of the United Kingdom Companies Act 1985 requires the directors to "have regard to" the interests of the company's employees. The section is not expressed to be imperative, and critics of it suggest that it lacks bite. To date, no claim has ever been reported as having been
120:
There were also concerns that running companies ruthlessly for the financial benefit of the shareholders had a countervailing cost, making directors unwilling to participate in programmes that were beneficial to the community generally, or to the environment. It also meant that companies became much
161:
and there are fears of widespread litigation, and increase in director's insurance premiums. However, because the new duties are expressed in non-imperative terms, and there is no sanction, the likelihood is that although they will empower the board of directors to take decisions that do not appear
301:
The key distinctions are for whose benefit the rule is intended (the shareholders on the one hand, and the creditors on the other) and the result (a transaction that fails for want of corporate benefit returns the property to the company generally, and, if the company is insolvent, would be subject
72:
held that the paying of a gratuity to employees prior to their dismissal was an improper exercise of the powers of the company, because the company was no longer a going concern, and thus stood to obtain no benefit (and no furtherance of its objects) through the payment of the gratuity; as
157:
The proposed new duties have been subject to some criticism, both from those who argue that the new duties do not have sufficient bite, and also from those who fear that it diverts directors' focus from what it is that they are meant to be doing (viz., generating
94: 199:: Although most examples of failure for want of corporate benefit involve transactions which were either a gift, or were made at a substantial undervalue, the concept is different in purpose and effect from provisions of insolvency law which prohibit 116:
merely by acting with what others might regard as common human decency. Where the company's property could not be recovered from the third party, the directors would be personally liable to recompense the company.
314:. Transactions that fail for want of corporate benefit fail entirely, but transactions at an undervalue usually only require the enriched party to disgorge the extent of the undervalue 130:
However, in some jurisdictions there are proposals to make the power to act otherwise than for the financial benefit of the company even wider. For example, in the United Kingdom, the
124:
Some legal systems have now abrogated by statute the rule that as against third parties the transaction may be void if it has insufficient commercial benefit to the company.
121:
less willing to make donations to political parties, which may have had more impetus in bringing about legislative change than concern for communities or the environment.
77:
memorably remarked: "there are to be no cakes and ale except such as are required for the benefit of the company." (The decision itself is reversed by statute).
170:
Conceptually, it is important to distinguish failure of a transaction for want of corporate benefit from other related legal concepts. These include:
127:
In some countries, statutes now expressly provide for the directors to consider interests other than the pure financial interests of the shareholders.
193:
would still have failed for want of corporate benefit if, for example, the company had allowed employees to purchase company property at a discount.
69: 348: 112:
The rule is generally seen to be particularly harsh towards both third parties and against directors, who could be regarded as being in
46:
in corporations are in most legal systems required to use their powers for the commercial benefit of the company and its members. At
310:
in the normal way. But in many jurisdictions, sums recovered relating to a transaction at an undervalue are ring-fenced for the
186: 107: 64: 189:(i.e. something of value). However, the consideration does not need to be equal, and the gratuity given in 292:
There is no penalty suggested for failure to consider those six items, and no provision for civil liability
343: 200: 338: 150:
the desirability of the company maintaining a reputation for high standards of business conduct, and
311: 271: 131: 113: 43: 303: 162:
to directly financially benefit the company, they are unlikely to ever be required to do so.
218: 144:
the need to foster the company's business relationships with suppliers, customers and others
50:, transactions which were not ostensibly beneficial to the company were set aside as being 307: 95:
Multinational Gas and Petrochemical Co v Multinational Gas and Petrochemical Services Ltd
159: 213: 261:(although they may have a claim against the directors for false warranty of authority) 332: 88:
of the company, and will thereby be binding upon the company, see for example under
178: 84:(and thus outside the scope of their authority) may nonetheless be ratified by the 17: 182: 89: 85: 81: 258: 51: 47: 147:
the impact of the company's operations on the community and the environment
74: 236:
For these purposes, it is important to remember the distinction between
257:
Who have no recourse against the company, as the transaction is
244:(how the company may achieve those objects), see generally 62:
An early illustration of this principle is to be found in
283:
made against a company or a director under that section.
138:
the likely consequences of any decision in the long term
80:
Any transaction which the directors enter into which is
153:
the need to act fairly as between members of a company
270:In the United Kingdom, see section 35B of the 240:(what the company is incorporated to do) and 8: 185:a contract requires both parties to provide 203:at a time when the company is insolvent. 181:in most common law legal systems, to be 141:the interests of the company's employees 229: 27:Legal obligation for company directors 166:Distinction from other legal concepts 7: 25: 82:outside the powers of the company 108:Corporate social responsibility 68:(1883) 23 Ch D 654, where the 1: 197:Transactions at an undervalue 191:Hutton v West Cork Railway Co 65:Hutton v West Cork Railway Co 365: 349:United Kingdom company law 105: 175:Failure of consideration 54:as against the company. 42:) is a concept that the 201:undervalue transactions 70:English Court of Appeal 32:interest of the company 114:breach of their duty 312:unsecured creditors 102:Modern developments 272:Companies Act 1985 132:Companies Act 2006 44:board of directors 40:commercial benefit 304:security interest 246:Cotman v Brougham 18:Corporate benefit 16:(Redirected from 356: 315: 299: 293: 290: 284: 280: 274: 268: 262: 255: 249: 234: 219:US corporate law 21: 364: 363: 359: 358: 357: 355: 354: 353: 329: 328: 323: 318: 308:floating charge 300: 296: 291: 287: 281: 277: 269: 265: 256: 252: 235: 231: 227: 210: 168: 110: 104: 60: 36:company benefit 28: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 362: 360: 352: 351: 346: 341: 331: 330: 327: 326: 322: 319: 317: 316: 294: 285: 275: 263: 250: 228: 226: 223: 222: 221: 216: 214:UK company law 209: 206: 205: 204: 194: 167: 164: 155: 154: 151: 148: 145: 142: 139: 103: 100: 59: 56: 26: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 361: 350: 347: 345: 344:Corporate law 342: 340: 337: 336: 334: 325: 324: 320: 313: 309: 305: 298: 295: 289: 286: 279: 276: 273: 267: 264: 260: 254: 251: 248:AC 514 at 522 247: 243: 239: 233: 230: 224: 220: 217: 215: 212: 211: 207: 202: 198: 195: 192: 188: 187:consideration 184: 180: 176: 173: 172: 171: 165: 163: 160: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 137: 136: 135: 133: 128: 125: 122: 118: 115: 109: 101: 99: 97: 96: 91: 87: 83: 78: 76: 71: 67: 66: 57: 55: 53: 49: 45: 41: 37: 33: 19: 339:Business law 297: 288: 278: 266: 253: 245: 241: 237: 232: 196: 190: 179:contract law 174: 169: 156: 129: 126: 123: 119: 111: 93: 86:shareholders 79: 63: 61: 39: 35: 31: 29: 183:enforceable 90:English law 34:(sometimes 333:Categories 321:References 306:such as a 106:See also: 58:Background 48:common law 177:: Under 158:profits), 208:See also 98:Ch 258. 75:Bowen LJ 302:to any 238:objects 242:powers 225:Notes 259:void 52:void 30:The 38:or 335:: 92:, 20:)

Index

Corporate benefit
board of directors
common law
void
Hutton v West Cork Railway Co
English Court of Appeal
Bowen LJ
outside the powers of the company
shareholders
English law
Multinational Gas and Petrochemical Co v Multinational Gas and Petrochemical Services Ltd
Corporate social responsibility
breach of their duty
Companies Act 2006

contract law
enforceable
consideration
undervalue transactions
UK company law
US corporate law
void
Companies Act 1985
security interest
floating charge
unsecured creditors
Categories
Business law
Corporate law
United Kingdom company law

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.