- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 6 years ago by
.
- Posts
There are quite a few questions in the bpp book which details examples of a director being disqualified for a period of ten years for fraudulent trading where they then utilise their accountant to act as either a de facto or de jure director accustomed to receiving their instructions as a shadow director.
In each case I am asked to only identify who is acting as what. Is this scenario legal? Surely the purpose of disqualification is the director is not trustworthy or reliable. Is this okay to do but the responsibility for any further wrongdoing then lies firmly on the head of the accountant/whoever who presumably has the incentive to make sure everything is above board from this point?
Previous to the questions I have never come across this before. I would have assumed a disqualified director was shunned from business matters and expected to wind up any business dealings and expend their efforts elsewhere.
Thanks
But (I assume) the question is not asking about the legality of the situation. It is of course illegal. And your answer (de facto, de jure, shadow) would be the basis for the Crown Prosecutor’s Office to put before a judge
And, in turn, the judge would find the director in breach of a disqualification order and the complicit accountant guilty as an accessory
Does that answer your question?
Thank you! It does. Although it may seem obvious I wasn’t sure if this illegal. I assumed so originally but I don’t recall ever reading this specifically so had to started to wonder if this was an acceptable normalised practice
Thanks for clarying this for me
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.