Corporate law Brisbane

Diversion of the corporate opportunity doctrine

HomePrivate: BlogCommercial lawCorporate lawDiversion of the corporate opportunity doctrine

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

Reading Time:

4–5 minutes

Directors have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company they direct and its shareholders.  This duty owed by the directors (Directors) arise by virtue of the fiduciary relationship in equity between a director and the company and the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act).

What is the corporate opportunity principle?

One particular duty of a Director as shown by the case law is not to make a personal gain at the expense of the company.  Directors who personally exploit an opportunity or knowledge gained by virtue of their position may be breaching their fiduciary obligations.  This is referred to as the corporate opportunity principle, and is characterised by a conflict between a Director’s personal interests, and the interests of the company.[1]  In these conflict situations, the Director’s fiduciary duty to the company prevents them from acting in their own interest.  In recognition of the importance of this duty is the Act, section 182 of which expressly prohibits directors from misusing:

  • their position as a director;[2] or
  • information obtained by virtue of this position;[3] or
  • gain an advantage for themselves or someone else; or
  • cause detriment to the company.

Section 182 is a civil penalty provision, meaning that if breached, ASIC can impose pecuniary penalties on a Director who contravenes it.  Further, in equity, the company may be entitled to seek relief from the courts against a Director who breaches their fiduciary duty to the company.

Remedies that may be available to a company include an account of profits, equitable compensation from the Director, and imposition of a constructive trust over the profits made by the Director.

When can a Director personally pursue an opportunity?

Notwithstanding the Director’s many duties to the company, there are circumstances where there Director may personally pursue an opportunity.  These are explained below.

Fully informed consent

The most appropriate method of refuting liability under the Act or in equity is to obtain fully informed consent from the company to pursue the opportunity in a personal capacity.  In obtaining consent, the Director must disclose all material facts and information to the company to allow it to make an informed decision whether to provide its consent or not.  There is authority that consent obtained from the company’s board of directors is sufficient.[4]

Opportunities outside scope of “trust and agency”

Where a Director personally pursues an opportunity which arose by virtue of their position as director, liability may be found not to apply where the opportunity was “outside the scope of the trust and outside the scope of the agency”.[5]  In other words, where the opportunity was not related to the person’s position as a director, they will not be acting in breach of their duties to the company by pursuing it personally.

For example, in the context of intellectual property the court has stated that the mere fact that a person is a Director of a company should not disqualify them from taking out a patent for an invention made by them during their period of service in that position.[6]

What should you do if you wish to personally pursue an opportunity?

The corporate opportunity principle makes it clear that Directors should tread very carefully when considering pursuing opportunities for personal profit.

Best practice would be to seek the fully informed consent of the company.  Even where a Director is confident their actions would not amount to a breach of their duties to the company, receiving the fully informed consent company will go a long way to relieving the Director of liability.

Where it is not possible to receive the fully informed consent of the company, or it is otherwise undesirable to inform the company of the opportunity, one should consider how the opportunity came to fruition.

If it is a direct result of his or her position as Director, then pursuing that opportunity without receiving the fully informed consent of the company is likely to amount to a breach of duty to the company.

Resigning as Director will not offer protection from an action for breach of fiduciary duty, however, if the opportunity is substantial and you will not be able to adequately service the company, this should be considered.

Links and further references

Cases

Cornerstone Property & Development Pty Ltd v Suellen Properties Pty Ltd [2014] QSC 265

Eastland Technology Australia Pty Ltd v Whisson [2005] WASCA 144 at [67]

Queensland Mines Ltd v Hudson (1978) 18 ALR 1

Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver [1942] UKHL 1

Further information about directors duties

If you need advice regarding your duties as a director of a company or have a dispute with other directors, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:

[1] Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver [1942] UKHL 1.

[2] Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s. 182.

[3] Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s. 183.

[4] Queensland Mines Ltd v Hudson (1978) 18 ALR 1.

[5] Cornerstone Property & Development Pty Ltd v Suellen Properties Pty Ltd [2014] QSC 265.

[6] Eastland Technology Australia Pty Ltd v Whisson [2005] WASCA 144 at [67].


Related insights about directors duties

  • Unfair contract terms – automatic renewal clauses explained

    Unfair contract terms – automatic renewal clauses explained

    9 November 2023 was a crucial date for Australian businesses because from that date significant penalties can now be imposed on businesses found to have unfair contract terms (UCT) in their contracts.  The Federal Government had introduced significant changes to laws relating to UCT on 10 November 2022.

    Read more …

  • Changes to unfair contract terms

    Changes to unfair contract terms

    The Treasury Laws Amendment (More Competition, Better Prices) Act 2022 (Cth) (Amending Act) received royal assent on 9 November 2022, introducing significant amendments to the Australian Consumer Law (ACL).  These amendments target the Unfair Contract Terms (UCT) provisions of the ACL, strengthening the rights of consumers while imposing stricter requirements on businesses using Standard Form…

    Read more …

  • ACCC consultation environmental and sustainability guidance

    ACCC consultation environmental and sustainability guidance

    The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission releases Draft Guidance to help businesses make environmental and sustainability claims without misleading consumers. Seeking input from stakeholders to ensure guidance is effective and up-to-date with consumer law.

    Read more …

  • Greenwashing on Facebook – ASIC fines Future Super

    Greenwashing on Facebook – ASIC fines Future Super

    Learn more about Greenwashing in Australia and the alleged incidents, with Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) responsible for regulating misconduct. ASIC issued an infringement notice to Future Super for making misleading Greenwashing claims on Facebook. Understand the legislative framework and how to avoid making false claims.

    Read more …

  • Consumer law updates business owners should know

    Consumer law updates business owners should know

    The Treasury Laws Amendment (More Competition, Better Prices) Act 2022 (Cth) (Act) amends various pieces of legislation to provide stronger competition and consumer protections.  In particular, the Act bolsters the penalties applicable for offences relating to unfair practices and unfair contract terms under as contained within the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA) and…

    Read more …

  • Resigning as director – when is it effective?

    Resigning as director – when is it effective?

    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…

    Read more …

  • DIN update – deadline looms for Australian company directors

    DIN update – deadline looms for Australian company directors

    As 30 November 2022 approaches, Australian company directors must apply for a Director Identification Number (DIN) to comply with the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and the Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006 (Cth). Learn how to obtain your DIN, the application process and what documents you must provide.

    Read more …

  • Can contractors owe fiduciary duties to principals?

    Can contractors owe fiduciary duties to principals?

    This article examines whether independent contractors owe fiduciary duties to their principal, as well as any additional statutory duties that may be imposed on independent contractors who are company directors.

    Read more …

  • Disputed debts in body corporate matters

    Disputed debts in body corporate matters

    This article examines the potential consequences of missing contribution levy payments in community titles schemes. It looks at specific cases and the risks associated with disputed body corporate debts, including the High Court decision of David Securities Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [1992] HCA 48.

    Read more …


Posted

in

,
Send this to a friend