Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGriffin, Stephen
dc.date.accessioned2008-05-14T14:23:24Z
dc.date.available2008-05-14T14:23:24Z
dc.date.issued2003
dc.identifier.citationNorthern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 54(1): 43-58
dc.identifier.issn0029-3105
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/25992
dc.description.abstractLooks at the circumstances justifying the identification of a person as a de facto director, in particular the "equal footing test" and the "holding out test" and the inconsistency with which these have been applied by the courts. Examines the case of Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Deverell which widens the definition of shadow directors. Considers the distinction between a de facto and shadow director and suggests reform of legislative definitions.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSLS Legal Publications
dc.relation.urlhttps://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/nilq54&i=59
dc.subjectCompany law
dc.subjectCompany directors
dc.subjectShadow directors
dc.subjectEqual footing test
dc.subjectHolding out test
dc.subjectUK
dc.titleProblems in the identification of a Company Director
dc.typeJournal article
dc.identifier.journalNorthern Ireland Legal Quarterly
html.description.abstractLooks at the circumstances justifying the identification of a person as a de facto director, in particular the "equal footing test" and the "holding out test" and the inconsistency with which these have been applied by the courts. Examines the case of Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Deverell which widens the definition of shadow directors. Considers the distinction between a de facto and shadow director and suggests reform of legislative definitions.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record