Corporate law Brisbane

Resigning as director – when is it effective?

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

Reading Time:

3–5 minutes

On 18 February 2021, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Combating Illegal Phoenixing) Act 2020 (Cth) (Treasury Act) came into effect and introduced various measures to combat “phoenixing”.  One of the reasons for this legislation was to help combat illegal phoenix activity which involves the creation of a new company to continue the business of an existing company that has been deliberately liquidated in order to evade various forms of tax.

One of the changes introduced was to amend section 203A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act), which deals with the requirements for directors resignation, by introducing section 203AA.  This article will compare the old requirements set out in section 203A with the new requirements provided in section 203AA and discuss the implications of the changes.

What is required for a director of a company to resign?

How a director resigns depends on how the company is governed.  For example, a company may have its own constitution which provides how a director may resign.  A company may also choose to be governed by the Replaceable rules under the Corporations Act if it does not have a constitution or it may be governed by a combination of both a constitution and the replaceable rules.  According to provision 10 of the tabled replaceable rules, section 203A  of the Corporations Act applies to the resignation of directors.

When was a director’s resignation effective previously?

Section 203A of the Corporations Act provided that:

A director of a company may resign as a director of the company by giving a written notice of resignation to the company at its registered office.”

It is necessary to determine what constitutes a ‘written notice’ as this may be open to broad interpretation. The inclusion of the word ‘may’ may also warrant further discussion as it indicates more flexibility regarding directors’ resignations.  In the case of Cain v Aeromarine Consulting Pty Limited [2003] FCA 1016 , the Federal court was tasked with deciding whether a director had resigned from a company by giving oral notice.  In this instance, the court ruled that oral resignation was a valid form of resignation as long as such resignation is accepted by the company.

When is a director’s resignation effective now?

Section 203AA of the Corporations Act now provides:

When resignation takes effect

  (1)  A person’s resignation as a director of a company takes effect on:

 (a)         if, within 28 days after the day the person stopped being a director of the company, ASIC is notified of that fact under subsection 205A(1) or 205B(5)–the day the person stopped being a director of the company; or

 (b)        in any other case–the day written notice is lodged with ASIC stating that the person has stopped being a director of the company.

Are there any changes required by ASIC?

ASIC must be notified of the resignation by the completion and lodgement of the appropriate ASIC form.  A Form 484 may be lodged by the company or a Form 370 may be lodged by the director personally.  It is also important to note that if the resignation of a director will leave the company without at least one director, such resignation will not take effect unless the company is being wound up.

What are the implications of non-compliance?

Simply put, a Director’s resignation will not take effect unless ASIC are notified within 28 days.  This means that the risks and responsibilities associated with being a director will still be active such as, insolvent trading.  To remedy a resignation date that is more than 28 days old but is less than 56 days old, an application may be made to ASIC within 56 days from the claimed resignation date and submit reasons for such using a Form 502.  Fees will apply.  If the application is accepted by ASIC, the resignation date will be deemed the date claimed in the application.

Takeaways

It is important that when a person resigns as a Director, that the correct procedure is followed to ensure their resignation is effective.  Otherwise, a Director may remain personally liable for various obligations and liabilities whilst under the impression that they no longer hold a directorship.

Links and further references

Legislation

Treasury Laws Amendment (Combating Illegal Phoenixing) Act 2020 (Cth)

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)

Cases

Cain v Aeromarine Consulting Pty Limited [2003] FCA 1016

Further information about resigning as a director

If you need advice on how to resign as a director, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:


Related insights about resigning as a director

  • WIJOAV v Goldstone – shareholder oppression in a private equity context

    WIJOAV v Goldstone – shareholder oppression in a private equity context

    The recent case of WIJOAV Services Pty Ltd v Goldstone Private Equity Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 622 (WIJOAV v Goldstone) involved a claim of shareholder oppression under section 232 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act).  The case established that a shareholder in a private equity fund may be oppressed by a co-investor where…

    Read more …

  • Federal Court dismisses continuous disclosure claim

    Federal Court dismisses continuous disclosure claim

    The Federal Court recently dismissed Australia Securities and Investment Commission’s (ASIC) claim in Australian Securities and Investment Commission v Nuix Limited [2026] FCA 490 (ASIC v Nuix) that Nuix Limited breached its obligations under section 674 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act).  Nuix Limited (Nuix) successfully contested ASIC’s allegation that it had breached…

    Read more …

  • Does your start-up meet the ESIC tax-offset criteria?

    Does your start-up meet the ESIC tax-offset criteria?

    Federal government introduced the Tax Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives for Innovation) Act 2016 (Cth) to provide tax incentives for investors in an eligible early stage innovation company (ESIC), including 20% up-front non-refundable tax offset and capital gains tax (CGT) exemption for all types of investors meeting criteria.

    Read more …

  • Valuing ESS Interests

    Valuing ESS Interests

    A company, whether listed or unlisted, can grant its employees an interest in its equity (ESS Interest), including through an employee share scheme (ESS) or employee share option plan (ESOP).  There are restrictions contained in both the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act) and Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Cth) (ITAA) that determine the price…

    Read more …

  • ESS vs ESOP – what’s the difference?

    ESS vs ESOP – what’s the difference?

    Employee share schemes (ESS) and employee share option plans (ESOP) are commonly used by corporations to incentivise employees and align performance with company growth by providing them with an interest in the company.  While the terms are often used interchangeably, they have distinct legal and structural differences under Australian law.  This article explains the key…

    Read more …

  • Disputed ESOP – Selak v National Tiles Co Pty Ltd

    Disputed ESOP – Selak v National Tiles Co Pty Ltd

    In the case of Selak v National Tiles, the Vic Supreme Court considered whether a company breached an option agreement governed by the terms of an Employee Share Option Plan (ESOP) by requiring an option holder to execute an undisclosed shareholders’ agreement as a condition of exercising vested options.  

    Read more …

  • Can a unit trust be wound up by the oppression remedies

    Can a unit trust be wound up by the oppression remedies

    The Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corps Act) grants the Courts the power to award remedies under section 233, specifically designed to address situations of oppression within corporate entities under section 232.  These remedies, also known as the “Oppression Remedies”, aim to resolve situations where a company’s conduct unfairly prejudices its members or shareholders.  While primarily…

    Read more …

  • Directors’ obligations to comply with Accounting Standards

    Directors’ obligations to comply with Accounting Standards

    Directors are personally liable for ensuring their company operates in accordance with corporate governance and accounting standards.  Obligations contained in part 2M.2 and 2M.3 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act) outline obligations for companies to keep financial records and prepare annual financial and director’s reports.  Sections 180 and 344 of the Corporations Act…

    Read more …

  • Accounting standards matter: the company’s obligation

    Accounting standards matter: the company’s obligation

    Australian accounting standards (Accounting Standards) are often considered solely the domain of auditors and accountants.  However, they are a crucial aspect of corporate law and governance in Australia.  For directors, officers, and their professional advisers, the key issue is not the technical details of the Accounting Standards, but rather their legal enforceability.  A failure to…

    Read more …


Posted

in

,
Send this to a friend