Solvency, company directors’ duties and the problem of process and enforcement - A comparative study

This study examines the legal provisions in relation to creditors’ protection, particularly when the company is insolvent and seeks to compare different statutory approaches with the view of determining the best reforms for Malaysia. Three jurisdictions have been chosen; the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia as the basis of comparison due to similar legal history as these countries have often been referred by the Malaysian Courts to assist in the interpretation of the law. To determine the question of creditors’ protection, the thesis will address several main issues. Firstly, the thesis examines the relationship between separate legal entity and limited liability. To do so it questions the circumstances when directors will be personally liable for the debt of the company and the extent to which they are liable. The issue will be explored in the light of the shareholder primacy theory which forms the basis of company law. Directors’ duties therefore are developed with the view of protecting shareholders; and the failure to do so will cause directors to be personally liable. The thesis also considers the arguments for stakeholders’ theory which mandates directors to take account of other stakeholders’ interests in addition to shareholders’ when making decisions. Secondly, it also investigates on how the piercing of the corporate veil and imposing liability on directors will provide protection to creditors especially when the company is insolvent. In order to do so, it scrutinizes the legislative initiatives on the issue as well as the judicial response to the statute. The thesis traces the reforms of the historical doctrine of capital maintenance and the use of solvency test as a replacement to protect creditors. It also provides comprehensive analyses of the law on the issue of remedies in order to ascertain whether the current legal provisions are adequately to protect creditors

Distribution of profits under the companies act 2016: satisfying the insolvency test / Hariati Mansor

Under the law, distribution of profits or dividends may only be paid to members of a company if there are profits available for that purpose. The Companies Act 2016 requires that the company can only make the distribution to the shareholders out of profit if the company is solvent. Previously, in the Companies Act 1965, the company can pay dividends to its shareholders out of its profits and there is no requirement that the company must fulfill the solvency test. The aim of this paper is to look at the new requirement of solvency test and in what circumstances the company can pay out its dividends. It also examines the effects of non-compliance with the solvency requirements and the implications to the company and directors (if any) under the Act

Reawaken The Risk Governance in The Malaysian Corporate

Risk governance is about balancing the company’s business interests and the interests of stakeholders who might suffer loss or harm from the company’s commercial activities. It is mainly concerned with preventing mistakes or wrongdoings than correcting them. This paper aim is to study the state of risk governance in the Malaysian corporate sector. It specifically studies the way risk governance is regulated and its relation to stakeholders’ interests. This study is based on the existing laws in Malaysia. The laws in the United Kingdom and the United States are studied for a comparative analysis and lessons to be learned. The paper suggests that the role of regulators is crucial to initiate and compel companies to establish and maintain a risk governance system and incorporate it as a corporate culture. It also suggests that co-regulation between the regulatory authorities and the industry is needed to successfully push efforts and participation by companies to establish and maintain an effective risk governance system. The paper is significant as it contributes to the improvement of risk governance in Malaysian businesses in general and in the corporate sector specifically and adds to the body of knowledge on law and governance

Pengiklanan dan Penjualan Lot Lidi dari Perspektif Undang-Undang Jenayah

Lot lidi ialah sebidang tanah pertanian di bawah 5 ekar geran yang sah dan dibahagikan kepada beberapa petak tertentu yang lebih kecil. Plot ini dipasarkan untuk dijual tanpa surat hak milik individu, yang telah menimbulkan kebimbangan undang-undang yang ketara. Isu teras berkisar tentang hak pemilikan, kerana urus niaga ini tidak diiktiraf di bawah Kanun Tanah Negara. Persoalan kajian utama berkaitan sama ada transaksi ini merupakan penipuan jenayah di bawah undang-undang Malaysia. Pertubuhan Kemanusiaan Komuniti Antarabangsa Malaysia dan Pertubuhan Prihatin Jenayah Komuniti Malaysia telah melaporkan penjualan lot lidi sebagai potensi kesalahan jenayah. Walau bagaimanapun, literatur sedia ada tidak mengkategorikan kes lidi secara khusus dalam konteks penipuan jenayah. Metodologi kajian adalah analisis kandungan kualitatif menggunakan sumber perundangan dan iklan penawaran. Matlamatnya adalah untuk menilai sama ada kenyataan yang dibuat semasa pengiklanan, tawaran membeli dan menjual serta perjanjian jualan boleh dikategorikan sebagai kenyataan palsu di bawah kesalahan jenayah penipuan. Penemuan penyelidikan mencadangkan pihak berkuasa tempatan boleh mengambil tindakan terhadap pengiklanan lot lidi yang secara terang-terangan melanggar undang-undang. Penjual yang mendorong pembeli menandatangani perjanjian pembelian lot lidi boleh boleh dituduh atas jenayah penipuan dan pemalsuan dokumen jika ia melibatkan salah nyata, penyembunyian fakta atau penyamaran. &nbsp