FANews
FANews
RELATED CATEGORIES
Category Legal Affairs
SUB CATEGORIES General | 

Holding a director liable for the debts of a company needs proof of fraud or recklessness

06 October 2015 Norton Rose Fulbright

Default judgment, without any evidence being led, was granted against a director under section 424(1) of the Companies Act 1973 on the basis that the business of the company was carried on recklessly or with intent to defraud creditors or for some other fraudulent purpose. No evidence was led to establish these allegations.

Even though the defendant director in Minnaar v van Rooyen failed to take the steps he should have taken to defend the action, the court set aside the judgment. Liability under section 424(1) requires proof of recklessness or fraud. The remedy is a punitive one and a causal link must be established between the conduct of the director and the liabilities of the company from the person alleging such liability.

Even if the matter is not defended the liquidators must prove that the directors acted recklessly or with intent to defraud the creditors. The judgment was set aside.

First published by Financial Institutions Legal Snapshot.

Quick Polls

QUESTION

The latest salvo in the active versus passive debate suggests that passive has an edge in highly efficient markets, or where the share universe is relatively small. In this context, how do you approach SA Equity investing?

ANSWER

Active always, the experts know best
Active, but favour the smaller funds
Passive for the win
Strike a balance between the two
fanews magazine
FAnews October 2024 Get the latest issue of FAnews

This month's headlines

The township economy: an overlooked insurance market
FSCA regulates crypto assets: a new era for investors
Building trust: one epic client experience at a time
Two-Pot System rollout underlines the value of financial advice
The future looks bright for construction
Subscribe now