Corporate opportunity

Last updated

The corporate opportunity doctrine is the legal principle providing that directors, officers, and controlling shareholders of a corporation must not take for themselves any business opportunity that could benefit the corporation. [1] The corporate opportunity doctrine is one application of the fiduciary duty of loyalty. [2]

Board of directors board composed of directors

A board of directors is a group of people who jointly supervise the activities of an organization, which can be either a for-profit business, nonprofit organization, or a government agency. Such a board's powers, duties, and responsibilities are determined by government regulations and the organization's own constitution and bylaws. These authorities may specify the number of members of the board, how they are to be chosen, and how often they are to meet.

Corporation separate legal entity that has been incorporated through a legislative or registration process established through legislation

A corporation is an organization, usually a group of people or a company, authorized to act as a single entity and recognized as such in law. Early incorporated entities were established by charter. Most jurisdictions now allow the creation of new corporations through registration. Corporations enjoy limited liability for their investors, which can lead to losses being externalized from investors to the government or general public, while losses to investors are generally limited to the amount of their investment.

Fiduciary person who takes care of money for another person or organization

A fiduciary is a person who holds a legal or ethical relationship of trust with one or more other parties. Typically, a fiduciary prudently takes care of money or other assets for another person. One party, for example, a corporate trust company or the trust department of a bank, acts in a fiduciary capacity to another party, who, for example, has entrusted funds to the fiduciary for safekeeping or investment. Likewise, asset managers, including managers of pension plans, endowments, and other tax-exempt assets, are considered fiduciaries under applicable statutes and laws. In a fiduciary relationship, one person, in a position of vulnerability, justifiably vests confidence, good faith, reliance, and trust in another whose aid, advice, or protection is sought in some matter. In such a relation good conscience requires the fiduciary to act at all times for the sole benefit and interest of the one who trusts.

A fiduciary is someone who has undertaken to act for and on behalf of another in a particular matter in circumstances which give rise to a relationship of trust and confidence.

Contents

Application

The corporate opportunity doctrine does not apply to all fiduciaries of a corporation; rather, it is limited to directors, officers, and controlling shareholders. [3] The doctrine applies regardless of whether the corporation is harmed by the transaction; indeed, it applies even if the corporation benefits from the transaction. [4] The corporate opportunity doctrine only applies if the opportunity was not disclosed to the corporation. If the opportunity was disclosed to the board of directors and the board declined to take the opportunity for the corporation, the fiduciary may take the opportunity for him- or herself. [5] When the corporate opportunity doctrine applies, the corporation is entitled to all profits earned by the fiduciary from the transaction. [6] In the leading English law case of Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver [1942] UKHL 1 it was held that "The rule of equity which insists on those who by use of a fiduciary position make a profit, being liable to account for that profit, in no way depends on fraud, or absence of bona fides ... or whether the plaintiff has in fact been damaged or benefited by his action."

English law legal system of England and Wales

English law is the common law legal system of England and Wales, comprising mainly criminal law and civil law, each branch having its own courts and procedures.

<i>Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver</i>

Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver[1942] UKHL 1, is a leading case in UK company law regarding the rule against directors and officers from taking personal advantage of a corporate opportunity in violation of their duty of loyalty to the company. The Court held that a director is in breach of his duties if he takes advantage of an opportunity that the corporation would otherwise be interested in but was unable to take advantage. However the breach could have been resolved by ratification by the shareholders, which those involved neglected to do.

Elements

A business opportunity is a corporate opportunity if the corporation is financially able to undertake the opportunity, the opportunity is within the corporation's line of business, and the corporation has an interest or expectancy in the opportunity. [7] The Delaware Court of Chancery has stated, "An opportunity is within a corporation's line of business . . . if it is an activity as to which the corporation has fundamental knowledge, practical experience and ability to pursue." [8] In In re eBay, Inc. Shareholders Litigation, investing in various securities was held to be in a line of business of eBay despite the fact that eBay's primary purpose is to provide an online auction platform. [9] Investing was in a line of business of eBay because eBay "consistently invested a portion of its cash on hand in marketable securities." [10] A corporation has an interest or expectancy in a business opportunity if the opportunity would further an established business policy of the corporation. [11]

The Delaware Court of Chancery is a court of equity in the American state of Delaware. It is one of Delaware's three constitutional courts, along with the Supreme Court and Superior Court.

See also

Related Research Articles

A shareholder is an individual or institution, including a corporation,that legally owns one or more shares of stock in a public or private corporation. Shareholders may be referred to as members of a corporation. Legally, a person is not a shareholder in a corporation until their name and other details are entered in the corporation‘s register of shareholders or members. A beneficial shareholder is the person that has the economic benefit of ownership of the shares, while a nominee shareholder is the person who is on the corporation’s register as the owner while being in fact acting for the benefit and at the direction of the beneficiary, whether disclosed or not.

Trustee person who holds property, authority, or a position of trust or responsibility for the benefit of another

Trustee is a legal term which, in its broadest sense, is a synonym for anyone in a position of trust and so can refer to any person who holds property, authority, or a position of trust or responsibility for the benefit of another. A trustee can also refer to a person who is allowed to do certain tasks but not able to gain income. Although in the strictest sense of the term a trustee is the holder of property on behalf of a beneficiary, the more expansive sense encompasses persons who serve, for example, on the board of trustees of an institution that operates for a charity, for the benefit of the general public, or a person in the local government.

The business judgment rule is a case law-derived doctrine in corporations law that courts defer to the business judgment of corporate executives. It is rooted in the principle that the "directors of a corporation... are clothed with [the] presumption, which the law accords to them, of being [motivated] in their conduct by a bona fide regard for the interests of the corporation whose affairs the stockholders have committed to their charge". The rule exists in some form in most common law countries, including the United States, Canada, England and Wales, and Australia.

Duty of loyalty

The duty of loyalty is often called the cardinal principal of fiduciary relationships, but is particularly strict in the law of trusts. In that context, the term refers to a trustee's duty to administer the trust solely in the interest of the beneficiaries, and following the terms of the trust. It generally prohibits a trustee from engaging in transactions that might involve self-dealing or even an appearance of conflict of interest. Furthermore, it requires a fiduciary to deal with transparency regarding material facts known to them in interactions with beneficiaries.

A corporate promoter is a firm or person who does the preliminary work incidental to the formation of a company, including its promotion, incorporation, and flotation, and solicits people to invest money in the company, usually when it is being formed. An investment banker, an underwriter, or a stock promoter may, wholly or in part, perform the role of a promoter. Promoters generally owe a duty of utmost good faith, so as to not mislead any potential investors, and disclose all material facts about the company's business.

<i>Smith v. Van Gorkom</i>

Smith v. Van Gorkom 488 A.2d 858 is a United States corporate law case of the Delaware Supreme Court, discussing a director's duty of care. It is often called the "Trans Union case". Van Gorkom is sometimes referred to as the most important case regarding business organizations because it shows a unique scenario when the board is found liable even after applying the business judgment rule. The decision "stripped corporate directors and officers of the protective cloak formerly provided by the business judgment rule, rendering them liable for the tort of gross negligence for the violation of their duties under the rule."

Meinhard v. Salmon, 164 N.E. 545, is a widely cited case in which the New York Court of Appeals held that partners in a business owe fiduciary duties to one another where a business opportunity arises during the course of the partnership. The court holds that the fiduciary duty of communication was breached where a partner in a joint venture failed to inform his co-partner of a profitable opportunity that was offered by a third-party who was ignorant of the partnership. Furthermore, the duty of loyalty was breached where the partner appropriated to himself a benefit arising from his status as a partner without allowing his co-partner an opportunity to compete. This holding relates to the doctrine of corporate opportunity.

Internal affairs doctrine

The internal affairs doctrine is a choice of law rule in corporations law. Simply stated, it provides that the "internal affairs" of a corporation will be governed by the corporate statutes and case law of the state in which the corporation is incorporated, sometimes referred to as the lex incorporationis.

United Kingdom company law corporate law of the United Kingdom

The United Kingdom company law regulates corporations formed under the Companies Act 2006. Also governed by the Insolvency Act 1986, the UK Corporate Governance Code, European Union Directives and court cases, the company is the primary legal vehicle to organise and run business. Tracing their modern history to the late Industrial Revolution, public companies now employ more people and generate more of wealth in the United Kingdom economy than any other form of organisation. The United Kingdom was the first country to draft modern corporation statutes, where through a simple registration procedure any investors could incorporate, limit liability to their commercial creditors in the event of business insolvency, and where management was delegated to a centralised board of directors. An influential model within Europe, the Commonwealth and as an international standard setter, UK law has always given people broad freedom to design the internal company rules, so long as the mandatory minimum rights of investors under its legislation are complied with.

<i>Guth v. Loft Inc.</i>

Guth v. Loft Inc, 5 A.2d 503, 23 Del. Ch. 255 is a Delaware corporation law case, important for United States corporate law, on corporate opportunities and the duty of loyalty. It deviated from the year 1726 rule laid down in Keech v Sandford that a fiduciary should leave open no possibility of conflict of interest between his private dealings and the job he is entrusted to do.

Directors' duties are a series of statutory, common law and equitable obligations owed primarily by members of the board of directors to the corporation that employs them. It is a central part of corporate law and corporate governance. Directors' duties are analogous to duties owed by trustees to beneficiaries, and by agents to principals.

United States corporate law

United States corporate law regulates the governance, finance and power of corporations in US law. Every state and territory has its own basic corporate code, while federal law creates minimum standards for trade in company shares and governance rights, found mostly in the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended by laws like the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 and the Dodd–Frank Act of 2010. The US Constitution was interpreted by the US Supreme Court to allow corporations to incorporate in the state of their choice, regardless of where their headquarters are. Over the 20th century, most major corporations incorporated under the Delaware General Corporation Law, which offered lower corporate taxes, fewer shareholder rights against directors, and developed a specialized court and legal profession. Nevada has done the same. Twenty-four states follow the Model Business Corporation Act, while New York and California are important due to their size.

<i>Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc.</i>

Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc., 506 A.2d 173, was a landmark decision of the Delaware Supreme Court on hostile takeovers.

Directors' duties in the United Kingdom bind anybody who is formally appointed to the board of directors of a UK company.

Canadian corporate law

Canadian company law concerns the operation of corporations in Canada, which can be established under either federal or provincial authority.

Benefit corporation

In the United States, a benefit corporation is a type of for-profit corporate entity, authorized by 33 U.S. states and the District of Columbia that includes positive impact on society, workers, the community and the environment in addition to profit as its legally defined goals, in that the definition of "best interest of the corporation" is specified to include those impacts. Traditional C Corporation law does not specify the definition of "best interest of the corporation" which has led to profit motivations being used as the main driver for best interests. Benefit corporations may not differ much from traditional C corporations. A C corporation may change to a B corporation merely by stating in its approved corporate bylaws that it is a benefit corporation.

<i>Broz v. Cellular Information Systems Inc.</i>

Broz v. Cellular Information Systems Inc., 637 A.2d 148, is a US corporate law case, concerning the standard in Delaware corporations regarding conflicts of interest. It exemplifies that the Delaware courts spend considerable resources inquiring into whether a director has had an actual conflict of interest, as opposed to the traditional common law approach which demanded that there should be no possibility of a conflict.

References

  1. ↑ 18B Am. Jur. 2d Corporations § 1536 (1964).
  2. ↑ Id.
  3. ↑ Id.
  4. ↑ Id. § 1538.
  5. ↑ Id. § 1539.
  6. ↑ Id. § 1538, 1540.
  7. ↑ Id. § 1536.
  8. ↑ Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc. v. Stewart, 833 A.2d 961, 972-73 (Del. Ch. 2003).
  9. ↑ In re eBay, Inc. S'holders Litig., 2004 Del. Ch. LEXIS 4 (2004).
  10. ↑ Id. at *12.
  11. ↑ 18B Am. Jur. 2d Corporations § 1542 (1964).
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.