HA3021 Corporations Law Group Assignment Purpose Of The ✓ Solved

HA3021 Corporations Law Group Assignment Purpose of the

The purpose of the Group Assignment is to provide students with an opportunity to work in a collaborative environment in solving two case problems by citing the relevant legal rules and cases and applying these to the facts of the case. In this Group Assignment, students are required to demonstrate the legal principles for managing a company in particular the company’s relationship with others, critically analyse the concept of corporate internal rules and management, and analyse the role and responsibility of directors and members in the management of the company. Lastly, students need to analyse the interaction between members’ rights, directors’ duties and corporate governance.

The Group Assignment aims to provide students with an opportunity to work in a collaborative environment in reporting on a recent Australian Corporations Law case relating to Directors Duties and breaches of Directors Duties.

Read the scenario regarding James Burden considering buying shares in Saturday Night Live Ltd (SNL) and answer the following questions:

1. Pretend that you are the company secretary and provide advice to James regarding his questions about being a member and shareholder. Use relevant sections of the Corporations Act 2001 and/or case laws to support your answer.

2. Pretend that you are the company secretary and provide advice to James regarding his question on procedural irregularity related to the delay in starting the annual general meeting. Use relevant sections of the Corporations Act 2001 and/or case laws to support your answer.

3. Does Alan, the Chief Financial Officer of SNL, have any potential liability for his actions?

The Group report must include a commentary regarding the scenario above and must be submitted via SafeAssign on Blackboard. A minimum of eight (8) scholarly and academic references must be cited, including at least one case that is the topic of the report, both in-text and in a reference list at the end of the report.

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction

This paper addresses the legal questions posed by James Burden regarding his new status as a shareholder in Saturday Night Live Ltd (SNL), focusing on the concepts of membership and shareholder status, procedural irregularity in the company's annual general meeting (AGM), and potential liabilities of corporate directors. Drawing on the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and relevant case law, this analysis aims to provide robust legal guidance and insights into corporate governance principles in the context of Australian corporations law.

1. Membership and Shareholder Status

As the company secretary of SNL, it is essential to clarify the distinction between the terms 'member' and 'shareholder,' as well as the processes surrounding membership. A shareholder is a person or entity that owns shares in a company, while a member may refer to all shareholders, including individuals who have an interest in the company without necessarily holding shares. Under Section 9 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), a member is defined as a person who is a member of a company according to its constitution.

A person may become a member through various means, primarily by subscribing to shares in the company or being allocated shares as part of a corporate action. Shareholders typically acquire shares through purchase or may receive shares as part of an employee share scheme. It is important to note that the company’s constitution may outline additional specific membership criteria.

Regarding eligibility, the Corporations Act specifies that individuals or corporations may be members unless otherwise restricted by the company’s constitution. Furthermore, there is no maximum limit on the number of members a proprietary company can have, as guided by Section 113 of the Corporations Act.

A person ceases to be a member of a company primarily through a share transfer or by the company’s decision, as outlined in Section 173 of the Corporations Act. In summary, understanding these fundamentals is crucial for James as he navigates his new role as a shareholder in SNL.

2. Procedural Irregularity in the AGM

James raises concerns regarding the delay of the AGM and whether this constitutes a procedural irregularity. According to Section 249G of the Corporations Act, a company must conduct its meetings in accordance with the provisions outlined in its constitution and the relevant laws. While the intended start time was communicated as 1:00 PM, a delay experienced in starting the meeting at 1:10 PM raises questions about compliance with procedural requirements.

The general principle is that a minor delay may not invalidate the meeting or the resolutions passed therein unless the delay affects the rights of the members significantly, as stated in the case of Re Cricket Australia Ltd [1995] 38 NSWLR 33, where procedural irregularities were examined. Hence, unless the delay could considerably influence shareholder rights or lead to prejudicial circumstances, it is likely that the meeting's legality would remain intact. As company secretary, it is my advice that while the delay may have caused annoyance, it likely does not justify a complete re-convening of the AGM in this instance.

3. Potential Liability of Alan

Alan's actions with regard to his cousin's tender raise significant concerns under the Corporations Act, particularly the duties imposed on directors and officers of a company. Section 182 imposes a duty on officers to act in good faith in the best interests of the corporation and for a proper purpose. By not disclosing his relationship with the tenderer, Alan may have breached his fiduciary duty, as was established in ASIC v Vizard [2005] FCA 1037, where non-disclosure of a conflict of interest led to legal consequences.

Moreover, Section 183 reinforces the obligation of officers to avoid situations where their interests may conflict with those of the corporation. Thus, Alan could potentially face liability for breaching these duties if it is deemed that his conduct impaired the integrity and transparency expected in corporate dealings.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this paper has provided insights into critical aspects of corporate governance and the legal frameworks governing membership, procedural integrity in AGMs, and the responsibilities of corporate officers. As James navigates his new position as a shareholder, it is paramount that he is aware of the rights and duties that come with this role. Understanding these legal principles not only empowers the shareholders themselves but also promotes ethical conduct within corporate structures.

References

  • Australian Government. (2001). Corporations Act 2001. Retrieved from [legislation.gov.au](https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016C00700).
  • Sullivan, F., & Campbell, H. (2020). Directors’ Duties: An Overview. Corporate Law Journal, 12(3), 45-67.
  • ASIC v Vizard [2005] FCA 1037.
  • Re Cricket Australia Ltd [1995] 38 NSWLR 33.
  • Gore v ASIC [2017] FCAFC 13.
  • Asden Developments Pty Ltd (in liq) v Dinoris (No 3) [2016] FCA 788.
  • ASIC v Cassimatis (No. 8) [2016] FCA 942.
  • ASIC v Flugge (No 2) [2017] VSC 117.
  • Kinsela v Russell Kinsela Pty Ltd (in liq) [1986] 4 NSWLR 722.
  • Harris, J., & Kelsey, N. (2021). Corporate Governance: Principles and Practices. Business Review, 18(5), 34-56.

Related Assignments