Company Law
Task details:
“The question is not whether, viewed objectively by the court, the particular act or omission which is challenged was in fact in the interests of the company; still less is the question whether the court, had it been in the position of the director at the relevant time, might have acted differently. Rather, the question is whether the director honestly believed that his act or omission was in the interests of the company”.
(Parker, J in Regentcrest plc v Cohen [2001] 2 BCLC 319)
Critically analyse this statement with reference to s.172 of the Companies Act 2006 and to relevant case law focusing in particular on the concept of “enlightened shareholder value”.
Instructions:
In this essay-style assignment you are expected to take a broad view of the issues arising from this statement and what it demonstrates in relation to the directors’ general statutory duty to promote the success of the company. You will need to consider the applicable law in the Companies Act and also relevant case law relating to the common law duty on which s.172 is based.
Read carefully both the written and online guides to the OSCOLA referencing. Improper referencing results in lower marks.
Your answer must be word-processed using Microsoft Word. All assessments must be written in Arial or Calibri font, 12pt with 1.5 spacing. Please put page numbers at the bottom of your script.
