company law ans
Sample Tutorial Answers (HBL221N Company Law)
To answer all legal questions, students are to follow the essential steps of:
(1) Identification of the issues in the questions;
(2) State the relevant laws that can be used to resolve the issues in the questions;
(3) Application of the relevant laws to the facts in the questions to resolve the issues in the questions (i.e. arguments); and
(4) Conclusion based on arguments in Point (3). Your conclusion must resolve your issues in Point (1).
NOTE: USE THESE SAMPLE ANSWERS AS A REFERENCE ONLY! THESE ANSWERS WILL NOT HELP YOU PASS YOUR EXAM!
Tutorial 1
Q2. Bristow is a substantial shareholder in Chester-Perry Industries Ltd. A business competitor, Gun and Fames Pty Ltd, is selling in great volume a cookbook similar to one in respect of which Chester-Perry Industries holds the copyright. Bristow believes his company has incurred a substantial loss and his own shares have been reduced in value by $150,000. His solicitors believe an infringement of copyright has occurred. Eccles and Pollock are the directors of Chester-Perry Industries Ltd. They state that they have decided not to litigate because they believe that to take legal action for infringement of copyright is too expensive and risky. Bristow is unsure whether the directors of Chester-Perry Industries have any interest in Gun and Fames Pty Ltd. On the general principles laid down Salomon’s case, can Bristow sue Gun & Fames?
Issue: Can Bristow sue Gun & Fames on behalf of Chester-Perry as a shareholder in Chester-Perry?
Relevant law: Salomon.
Application: The House of Lords in Salomon held that upon incorporation, a company becomes a separate legal entity even though its issued shares are beneficially owned by the same person like in Salomon. Similarly in this question, Chester-Perry is a company that has been incorporated and therefore, is a separate legal entity from all its shareholders. In this case, according
To answer all legal questions, students are to follow the essential steps of:
(1) Identification of the issues in the questions;
(2) State the relevant laws that can be used to resolve the issues in the questions;
(3) Application of the relevant laws to the facts in the questions to resolve the issues in the questions (i.e. arguments); and
(4) Conclusion based on arguments in Point (3). Your conclusion must resolve your issues in Point (1).
NOTE: USE THESE SAMPLE ANSWERS AS A REFERENCE ONLY! THESE ANSWERS WILL NOT HELP YOU PASS YOUR EXAM!
Tutorial 1
Q2. Bristow is a substantial shareholder in Chester-Perry Industries Ltd. A business competitor, Gun and Fames Pty Ltd, is selling in great volume a cookbook similar to one in respect of which Chester-Perry Industries holds the copyright. Bristow believes his company has incurred a substantial loss and his own shares have been reduced in value by $150,000. His solicitors believe an infringement of copyright has occurred. Eccles and Pollock are the directors of Chester-Perry Industries Ltd. They state that they have decided not to litigate because they believe that to take legal action for infringement of copyright is too expensive and risky. Bristow is unsure whether the directors of Chester-Perry Industries have any interest in Gun and Fames Pty Ltd. On the general principles laid down Salomon’s case, can Bristow sue Gun & Fames?
Issue: Can Bristow sue Gun & Fames on behalf of Chester-Perry as a shareholder in Chester-Perry?
Relevant law: Salomon.
Application: The House of Lords in Salomon held that upon incorporation, a company becomes a separate legal entity even though its issued shares are beneficially owned by the same person like in Salomon. Similarly in this question, Chester-Perry is a company that has been incorporated and therefore, is a separate legal entity from all its shareholders. In this case, according