We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 141

D&O down under

  • Mills & Reeve LLP
  • -
  • Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 18 2014

A December 2013 decision of the New Zealand Supreme Court fundamentally influenced the treatment of competing interests under directors' and

Consumer Guarantees Act is a big risk for B2B: an example

  • Wigley + Company
  • -
  • New Zealand
  • -
  • June 17 2014

This is the fifth article in our special series on the big B2B and B2C law changes from 17 June. We include a check list to help reduce liability

BFSL 2007 Ltd v Steigrad 2013 NZSC 156

  • Hesketh Henry
  • -
  • New Zealand
  • -
  • April 28 2014

On 23 December 2013, the Supreme Court delivered a controversial decision on the operation of s 9 of the Law Reform Act 1936 on costs-inclusive

Supreme Court overturns Steigrad decision on directors' defence costs

  • Bell Gully
  • -
  • New Zealand, United Kingdom
  • -
  • February 17 2014

The Supreme Court released its decision at the end of last year in the Steigrad litigation, ruling that third party claimants do have a statutory

Creditors can successfully challenge an unfair deed of company arrangement

  • CBP Lawyers
  • -
  • Australia, New Zealand
  • -
  • February 14 2014

The NSW Supreme Court has recently set aside a deed of company arrangement (DOCA) on the basis that it was prejudicial to creditors who voted against

Director's insurance - Supreme Court decides against company directors

  • Simpson Grierson
  • -
  • New Zealand, United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 21 2014

Directors routinely ensure that they have D&O insurance to protect them and pay for their defence costs if they are personally sued. However, the

Supreme Court overturns Steigrad decision on directors' defence costs

  • Bell Gully
  • -
  • New Zealand, United Kingdom
  • -
  • December 23 2013

Christmas came early for investors in failed finance company Bridgecorp, in the form of a Supreme Court ruling that Bridgecorp's claim to insurance

Liquidators obtain summary judgment for breach of director's duty

  • Buddle Findlay
  • -
  • New Zealand
  • -
  • December 13 2013

In Fisk v Fawcet 2013 NZHC 2811 the liquidators of Luxta Limited sought summary judgment against Luxta's director, Mr Fawcet, for breach of his

English High Court imposes greater accountability upon shadow directors

  • Buddle Findlay
  • -
  • New Zealand, United Kingdom
  • -
  • December 13 2013

The definition of director outlined in section 126(1) of the Companies Act 1993 (NZ) encompasses shadow directors - people with 'whose directions

Shareholder silence may constitute fully informed consent

  • Buddle Findlay
  • -
  • New Zealand, United Kingdom
  • -
  • December 13 2013

In Sharma v Sharma 2013 EWCA Civ 1287, the English Court of Appeal considered the defence of fully informed consent in the context of a claim