This paper “Company Law and Virtue Ethics” focuses on whether any action should be taken against Candy about the gift of Rex. Candy, a promoter accepted a gift from a client without Asif and Becky (other promoters) awareness and this caused a conflict of interest…
Download file to see previous pages...
A promoter main duty is to offer sufficient funding or capital for the company and to ensure that all the formalities required by the statute of incorporation are met. The promoters have a fiduciary duty to the company and its shareholders. The promoters cannot use secret corporate information for their personal gain or advantage. Becky and Asif can sue Candy to reclaim the gift of Rex 2010 for breach of fiduciary duties. Promoters normally owe fiduciary duties to the company that they are forming. They should thus disclose any profit they are making from the promotion either to the company shareholders or to an independent board. The company may sue a promoter for disgorgement of the profit and for rescission in case there is a breach of duty. Becky and Asif can also replace Candy as a shareholder because the gift of Rex 2010 created a conflict of interest between Candy and the company. When shareholders have a conflict with the decision taken by one of the employees, he or she can be changed or replaced in accordance with its articles or the pertinent law provisions. Furthermore, a company enjoys an independent existence and is used by shareholders to achieve the shareholder's economic purposes. The company can thus be used as a means of replacing or seeking compensation from Candy because she created a risk of loss of compensation for the company. The gift was a business courtesy- it was a gift from a client. Before accepting the gift, Candy should have informed the other partners and not kept the gift for personal use, instead, she created a conflict of interest by having a business relationship with Yienshiu. The most imperative character of Candy’s job was not to acquire a secret gain at the expense of the company. Candy-a promoter- had a legal obligation not to make secret proceeds from promoting the company without the consent of the other promoters (Tengku Abdullah v Mohd Latiff bin Shah Mohd, 2 MLJ 265). She also had the legal duty of disclosing to the Company about the gift by Yienshiu. She was not transparent in her dealings with the other shareholders and thus did not remain true to her fiduciary duties (Fairview Schools Sdn. Bhd v Indrani a/p Rajaratnam (No1) 1 MLJ 110). The rights of the two shareholders-Becky & Asif- were harmed by an act done to the company, it is to the company that they should look to institute appropriate action because though the company and shareholders suffered the same wrong, it is only the two shareholders right that was infringed. Candy was seen by Becky and Asif as a fiduciary of the company because her relationship with the other shareholders was supposed to be one of confidence and trust. Candy owed legal and ethical duties to the company as well as to Becky & Asif which she did not honor. She did not exercise due care while carrying out her duty and did not subordinate her personal interests to the organization of the company. Candy abused her position of reliance at the company in spite of the fact that Becky & Asif expected her to devote her full working efforts and time to the interests of the company and to stay away from any doings that would conflict or distract the company interests.
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Cite this document
(“Company Law and Virtue Ethics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved de https://studentshare.org/finance-accounting/1392172-company-law-for-accounts
(Company Law and Virtue Ethics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 Words)
“Company Law and Virtue Ethics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/finance-accounting/1392172-company-law-for-accounts.
However, other theorists would argue that telling a lie is wrong whether said to save a life or to create good for people. Whatever the outcomes are the fact that telling a lie is telling a lie does not change under all circumstances. The former approach to ethics is a part of consequentialism; however, the latter is an example of deontological ethics.
Virtue ethics focuses on implementing what is morally right. Virtue ethics Virtue ethics focuses on complying with moral ethics standards. Ethics focuses on doing what is right or correct and avoiding what is wrong or incorrect. Of the virtues, one virtue is justice.
These kinds of theories under the virtue ethics lay little or no emphasis at all on the kinds of rules people opt to select in favor of the others. The theory focuses on helping people have great character traits that are accepted in the society. Such characters are the ones that help people to develop well in life with such traits as kindness, as well as generosity.
Likewise, I also deem it right to say that our actions are also influenced by the trends of the current times.
As such, I would look at virtue ethics and good character as visionary goals that are supposed to act as mere goals in one's quest towards achieving success in all forms.
nst Hursthouse’s claims on virtue, Johnson bases his claims on the fact that Hursthouse has specified a “fully virtuous person” in the circumstances she mentions. He sets out another category of virtue, referring to those who are not fully virtuous, i.e., sub virtuous. In
Each individual is able to have the virtues, and the habits provide people with the ability to fulfill such virtues toward nature or contrary to nature (Cited in Dwyer 68). Thus, Aristotle aimed at discovering the character
Third, Springer is a well-known name in the list of authentic publishers. The author uses very logical line of action in order to provide the facts and validate with appropriate secondary sources.
This article is from a popular magazine published by Cable News Network.
The attempt of various philosophical theories of morality is to construct a moral identity that would suit personal life and guide people on doing good or bad in the society. Kant is among philosophers who have strived to explain the morality of human behavior and the
Great philosophers such as Aristotle, Socrates and Plato had their propositions about what morality entails. Aristotle asked, “What is the good of man?”, whereas Socrates, Plato and others asked, “what
1 Pages(250 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Company Law and Virtue Ethics for FREE!