Corrupt Small Claims' Tribunal referee [a magistrate] William J [Bill] Randall implements the Anglican corruption of corrupt Chief Justice Paul de Jersey,...
CDDM_IntroSubMenuSubSubMenu150.php
The Kramer Group of Frank Kramer of the Pacific Islands and Australia has unwittingly jumped on a sinking ship caused by the criminal history of Wayne Goss and his criminal destruction of evidence required for a court trial...
CDDM_IntroSubMenuSubSubMenu150.php
MENU: Wayne Goss' Free TV Australia. He Destroyed the Heiner Evidence; a Crime & Breach of 'Directors' Fiduciary Duty...
CDDM_IntroSubMenuSubSubMenu150.php
CMC's Dangerous Liaisons Report is a FRAUD & a CON on our Community, to HIDE, STEEL & HARDEN CORRUPTION in POLICE, COURTS & GOVERNMENT...
CDDM_IntroSubMenuSubSubMenu150.php
The Fiduciary
Duty towards the company by
company directors is a very strict duty, as with any Fiduciary
Duty. This has some
particular implications in regard to CRIME, and PERSONAL LIABILITY of
company directors. Company Directors are personally liable for breaches
of their Fiduciary
Duty to their company. This
is regardless of statute law, and is a result of long standing Common
Law. Hence, this is relevant in many countries including United
States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
Importantly, the Fiduciary
Duty is owed by each company
director to the Company, and not the shareholders. However, if a
company injures a person, regardless of whether that person is a
shareholder, creditor, employee, customer, COMPETITOR, or unrelated but
foreseeable party, that person can sue the company. If the
director, meaning all of them, have been derelict in exercising
their Fiduciary
Duty, then they can be joined in
that action, and would be personally liable, and unable to obtain the
benefit of the corporate veil, as espoused in the early landmark case
of Solomon v. Solomon.
In commerce/business finance, risks
are defined as either diversibable risk, or undiversifiable risk.
By it name, no-one needs to entertain diversifiable risk, as they can
'diversify' out of it. Hence, the market does not reward an owner
of assets accepting diversifiable risk.
The
Nature of every Director's decision; Instead of there being just one
decision of a judge, there are many decisions by many individuals;
every director. Every Director, by the nature of the Fiduciary
Duty owed to the company, has to
make his own personal decision. S/he has to make the purest type
decision. S/he does not have to consider the civil interests of
any other legal person, without of course, taking criminal advantage of
any other party. The director must consider only the interests of
her/his company. If, as is usually the case, another party is
involved, the director need not, in fact must not consider that other
person's interests. The director is NOT required to give the
other party Due Process, aka Natural Justice aka Procedural fairness,
in particular the 'Right to be Heard'.. Hence, the Director can
make a decision, that is adverse to any particular person, [but not
criminal of course], without giving that person the 'Right to be
Heard', a right of Natural Justice.
Directors
must then ACT upon their decisions; In fact, action is the only real way
they can show they have made the correct decision. Additionally,
unlike with a court case, which cannot be re-opened in general, a
director's decision and action can always be revisited. This is
one additional reason, that directors must always decide in favour of
their company, even if that requires their 'giving their company' the
'benefit fo the doubt'.
Consequences
for Directors for less than perfect decisions, and actions:
We will consider the usual case of
Public Listed companies. The Consequences arise in many ways.
Personal liability; usually he
would be involved in long corporate court cases with many defendants.
Public reputation of the
individual director, [few if any new directorships];
Market Price of the Shares of
any company associated with her.him, could fall sufficinetly, so the
whole board of directors is replaced by shareholders at an
Extraordinary General Meeting. .
If the share price falls, his
company could be taken over with his being sacked as a director, by the
new, usually corporate shareholder. [usually he would 'fall on his
sword'.] Additionally, all the other directors would probably be
sacked. So take notice,Directors of
Ausenco Limited.
These are the shareholders of the
listed companies, who will make decisions about investing in particular
companies. Directors who associate with corrupt individuals, will
become pariahs as the shareholders of other companies will not want
them to become directors of their companies if the shareprice will
fall. Sharew prices on a public exchange are affected by
Adam Smith's 'Invisible Hand', regardless of how much spin the company
publishes.
A company is inanimate but for the
actions of 'staff', and a company is 'dumb' or unable to think, but for
the action of directors.
The director's Fiduciary
Duty requires that the Director is
vigilant, of any possible dangers that could befall their
company. Hence, all we need to do with the internet is to place
the director on Notice. We do not need to 'serve' legal documents
upon the director.
'Defences'
not available to Directors, if they fail to discharge their Fiduciary
Duty:
Directors are unable to state
that there has been no proven case, or judgement, against the
'defendant' in a court of law, as the director, by his Fiduciary
Dutymust undertake his own
investigation, and make his decision considering only the interests of
his company. He must not consider the Due Process interests of
the 'defendant'. He does not need to hear the 'defendants'
'defence' or excuse. In fact, he would be unwise to do that, as
it could then be alleged that he had not put his company's interests
paramount.
Neither can the director state
that the 'Notice' was insufficient, or not given to him appropriately,
as the director's Fiduciary
Duty requires that the Director is
vigilant, of any possible dangers that could befall their
company. He cannot say he was not served appropriately.
Neither can he say he was
unaware of the implications of his Fiduciary
Duty as his Fiduciary
Duty requires that he has perfect
knowledge of his duties. He has consciously accepted his
appointment as Director. [Hence, it is not essential that I
explain this well here, to teach directors.] If they are unsure,
they know that they had better investigate their Duties. The
purpose of this article is to advise the many people ripped off and
bullied by the rspca
and the
likes of Wayne
Goss and the system established by him and his successors, that
this is the way to win. TAKE IT TO THE COMPANY
DIRECTORS. The appropriate decisions will be taken in
private, and the proper result will usually just happen, without any
announcement.
Consider two general classification of
cases involving CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR. [Where the CRIMINAL is on either
side of the company - world interface; ie whether the CRIMINAL is
inside or outside the company.] It is an accepted 'given' that
individuals and 'legal individuals'/entities, cannot be criminal,
assist criminals or be assisted by criminals.
Where the
company is dealing with a CRIMINAL or CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION: This was the case when Kerry
Stokes'
Seven Network Limited, was telecasting the TV show called 'Pet Rescue'.
This show promoted a criminal organization called RSPCA, and clearly
the Seven Nwetwork gained substantial financial advantage by
continuint to promote this criminal organization. We publicized
this fact, naming all
directors, [to focus their minds], and it worked. Seven
Network has not severed its ties with the riminal rspca who is now
paying 'CASH for COMMENT' to individual reporters for Channel 9 TV in
Australia.
Where a fellow director has acted
criminally, but has not been made accountable for his crime, and where
the 'coverup'
is continuing: This is the case with Wayne
Keith Goss.
linksforumworldrecession Links to our FORUMS
regarding the 21st Century World Recession, SURVIVING IT &
PROSPERING.
using
