Fiduciary

Whether or not corporations should pursue goals besides creating profit for shareholders has long been a matter of debate. For my part, the statement that “The actions undertaken by a corporation in the pursuit of shareholder wealth are justified, as long as they are not illegal” is valid. The reasons are presented below. To begin with, a corporation is created for the purpose of creating wealth for shareholders. In terms of property rights, shareholders that invested the principal are the joint

Lindsay is asking to inspect financial documents for two separate legal entities, and she has differing roles in both of the companies. Lindsay’s role in the LLC is a co-partner role. Thus, she could inspect the financial documents of LLC; however, she has dissociated. Dissociation “occurs when a partner ceases to be associated with the carrying on of the partnership business” and terminates his or her actual authority to act for the partnership and to participate in running the business” (259).

Addition to the Governmental Funds or General Fund Vance County has one type Proprietary Funds - Enterprise Funds which are used to report the same functions presented as business-type activities in the government-wide financial statements. The County uses enterprise funds to account for its water activity and for its solid waste management operations (Department, June 30, 2015). The County’s proprietary funds provide the same type of information found in the government-wide statements but in more

it might be said I OVERALL UNIT REFLECTION The past few weeks have been tough and definitely not what I was expecting of an ethics unit. Week in, week out I find myself stumped by questions I don’t have the answers to. However more than ever before I am trying to come up with decisive answers regarding what my opinion is on certain ethical issues, rather than just analysing the merits and demerits of other people’s viewpoints. II STRUCTURE OF REFLECTION For my reflection I will be outlining the

a whole. This was based on an precedent from a 1970 case law in which it was held that a director of a group of company is not in breach of his fiduciary duty if the decision was based on what a reasonable person could consider to be an act that was in the best interest of all companies in the group. Case law has also shown that in situations where the interest of the company and the creditor coincides, it is legitimate for the director to consider the interests of the creditors first . However

1. Project Chariot involves a conflict of interests. Describe this conflict, who it is between, and who stand to gain or lose from this project. The conflict of interest exists between the shareholders and the bondholders. After Project Chariot is implemented, MII will be of low debt level and HMC will be with high debt. The original bondholders will be tied to risky real estate assets with uncertain appreciation and expected income. Shareholders will gain and bondholders will lose, since splitting

PART B Is the protection provided by the corporate veil is justifiable and adequate? There is no clear framework of the rules that would cover the contingencies of a ruling to pierce the corporate veil Idoport Pty Ltd v National Australia Bank Ltd. The corporate Veil usually protects owners and shareholders from being held liable for corporate duties. Yet again a decision made by the court to lift that veil and would place the liability on shareholders, owners, administrators, executives and officers

and persons who deal with companies. Breach of duty is therefore breaking the Company Law. Simone’s Breaches of Director’s Duties and Defences To whom does Simone owe duties? Directors according to (Baxt et al 2005), owe a fiduciary duty to the company. They say fiduciary according to the High Court of Australia is the duty to act honestly, in good faith, and to the best of the directors’ ability in the interests of the company. In this context they note, the director must not allow

Different Concepts of the Firm: The precise legal details of the corporation’s differ across countries. The company law of the U.K is similar to the company law of the U.K because they share a common origin. The managers in both countries have a fiduciary duty to the shareholders. In other words, they have a strong requirement to act in the interests of shareholders. The channel through which shareholders exercises control of company affairs is the board of directors. The board is elected by shareholders

acceptance of a decision and determinations of a board of directors of a business establishment. Hence, the conflict is a psychological one resulting from within a human or organization that is authorized to make decisions (p.4-7). Fiduciary Obligations The most common fiduciary duties are the requirements to act in the principal’s interest and the duty of honesty. For example, most company codes of conduct requires the board of directors and the management to carry out their duties with all necessary