Overview
Question is :
Critically discuss the extent to which the Companies Act 2006 has reformed Directors` Duties. Additionally, identify what you believe to be the most significant reform to Directors’ Duties as a result of the Act and explain your reasoning.
(FILE IS TO HELP U )
Structure needed:
1. introduction ( overview about the subject - analysis ideas or the connection - theses) (500 word)
2. body FOR EACH SECTION IN COMPANY ACT ( INTRODUES and CRITICISE and EXPLAIN WHAT MAKES EACH OF THESE SECTION IS A significant reform to Directors’ Duties) + (BACK UP YOUR IDEAS BY CASES AND ARTICALS)(1500 word)
3. conclusion ( Summaries all the ideas)(500 word)
Suggested references that have to be in the essay:
1. Cases: Directors` Duties
Howard Smith Ltd v Ampol Petroleum [1974] AC 821 PC
Extrasure Travel Insurance Ltd v Scattergood[2003] 1 BCLC 598
Criterion Properties Plc v Stratford UK Properties LLC [2006] 1 BCLC 729)
Regentcrest Plc v Cohen [2001] 2 BCLC 80
Gaiman v National Assn for Mental Health [1970] 2 All ER362
Stobart Group Limited v Tinkler ([2019] EWHC 258)
Re Barings Plc (No 5) [1999] 1 BCLC 433
Re Queens, Moat Houses Plc, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Bairstow (No 2) [2005] 1 BCLC 136
Re Brian D Pierson (Contractors) Ltd [1999] BCC 29
Bhullar v Bhullar [2003] EWCA Civ 424
Cook v Deeks [1916] 1 AC 554
Foster Bryant Surveying Ltd v Bryant [2007] 2 BCLC 239
BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and ors [2022] UKSC 25
reading:
Andrew Keay, ‘Good faith and directors' duty to promote the success of their company,’ (2011) 32 Comp Law. P138
Company Law by Dignam and Lowry, 12th Ed., Ch 14 (Directors` Duties) OR Unlocking Company Law by Susan McLaughlin Chs 11-12 (Directors` Duties)
Important Notes:
1.Legal Issues
All relevant legal issues identified
2.Engagement with the Question
Full and focused engagement with the question
3.Knowledge and Understanding
Excellent knowledge and understanding of relevant legal principles including the most complex issues
4.Grasp of doctrinal / policy problems
Excellent grasp of relevant doctrinal / policy problems
5.Use of Materials
Fluent use of relevant and appropriate primary materials
6.Structure
Clear and compelling structure
7.Conclusions
Clear and compelling conclusions
8.Referencing
Clear and thorough referencing throughout
9.Standard of English
Excellent standard of English appropriate to complex / specialist legal matters
10.Presentation
Excellent presentation
Evidence of considerable independent research as well as core materials
12.Secondary Sources
Excellent incorporation of secondary sources into analysis
13.Ability to recognise and evaluate inconsistencies of legal argumentation
Excellent ability to recognise and evaluate inconsistencies of legal argumentation / to rank possible outcomes / to formulate some personal perspectives (where appropriate)