214:
and in the interests of the company (see now, s.172 Companies Act 2006). They also had to display such skill and care as should be reasonably expected from people with their knowledge and experience (see now, s.174 Companies Act 2006). The system of signing blank cheques was held to be negligent, and
29:
provision of the
Insolvency Act 1986 s.214. The director of a company must act in good faith and in the interests of the company, he must display such skill as may reasonably be expected of a person with his knowledge and experience, and he must at all times take such care as a prudent man would
221:
Foster J held further that it would not be appropriate for the court to exercise its discretion to relieve the three directors on the basis that they acted "honestly and reasonably" under s.448 of the
Companies Act 1948 (see now s.1157(1) Companies Act 2006).
71:
88:
174:
249:
239:
244:
150:
64:
138:
57:
200:
38:
Dorchester
Finance, which had gone insolvent, made a claim against Mr Stebbing and two other non-executive director
218:
Furthermore, no distinction should be drawn in principle between an executive and a non-executive director.
126:
162:
188:
26:
114:
22:
233:
211:
42:
who often signed blank cheques which were later countersigned by Mr
Stebbing.
39:
49:
210:
Foster J held that directors of a company were bound to act in
53:
65:
8:
90:Re Produce Marketing Consortium Ltd (No 2)
72:
58:
50:
176:Re Continental Assurance Co of London plc
215:liable for losses under s.214 IA 1986.
7:
151:Re Brian D Pierson (Contractors) Ltd
103:Dorchester Finance Co Ltd v Stebbing
139:Re Oasis Merchandising Services Ltd
14:
18:Dorchester Finance Co v Stebbing
250:1977 in United Kingdom case law
240:United Kingdom company case law
1:
201:United Kingdom insolvency law
245:High Court of Justice cases
266:
197:
185:
171:
159:
147:
135:
123:
111:
99:
85:
30:take on his own behalf.
127:Re Hydrodan (Corby) Ltd
80:Wrongful trading cases
189:Brooks v Armstrong
207:
206:
257:
177:
91:
74:
67:
60:
51:
27:wrongful trading
265:
264:
260:
259:
258:
256:
255:
254:
230:
229:
228:
208:
203:
193:
181:
175:
167:
163:Re Cubelock Ltd
155:
143:
131:
119:
115:Re Purpoint Ltd
107:
95:
89:
81:
78:
48:
36:
25:case under the
12:
11:
5:
263:
261:
253:
252:
247:
242:
232:
231:
227:
224:
205:
204:
198:
195:
194:
192:EWHC 2289 (Ch)
186:
183:
182:
172:
169:
168:
160:
157:
156:
148:
145:
144:
136:
133:
132:
124:
121:
120:
112:
109:
108:
100:
97:
96:
86:
83:
82:
79:
77:
76:
69:
62:
54:
47:
44:
35:
32:
23:UK company law
21:BCLC 498 is a
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
262:
251:
248:
246:
243:
241:
238:
237:
235:
225:
223:
219:
216:
213:
202:
196:
191:
190:
184:
179:
178:
170:
165:
164:
158:
153:
152:
146:
141:
140:
134:
129:
128:
122:
117:
116:
110:
105:
104:
98:
93:
92:
84:
75:
70:
68:
63:
61:
56:
55:
52:
45:
43:
41:
33:
31:
28:
24:
20:
19:
220:
217:
209:
187:
173:
161:
149:
137:
125:
113:
102:
101:
87:
37:
17:
16:
15:
40:accountants
234:Categories
212:good faith
180:2 BCLC 287
130:2 BCLC 180
94:5 BCC 569
118:BCLC 491
106:BCLC 498
46:Judgment
166:BCC 523
154:BCC 26
142:Ch 170
226:Notes
34:Facts
199:see
236::
73:e
66:t
59:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.