Zachary Kell recently wrote an article for Lexis titled ‘A candid approach? Leave to act applications and evidence for directors (Re V1CE Ltd)’
Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: By an application for leave to act as a director despite the acceptance of a disqualification undertaking pursuant to section 17 of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 (CDDA 1986), the court dismissed the same, finding that the evidence of the applicant did not adequately address the involvement of the former company’s bookkeeper in the former company and how this might affect that third party’s role as director of the new company. The court suggested that a fresh application be made in which the applicant should, among other things, offer to appoint an independent financial director (and leave was granted on this subsequent application). This decision is of interest in how it (i) looks at the requisite evidence for a CDDA 1986, s 17 application, (ii) suggests a duty of candour on applicants, and (iii) shows how the balance is struck between the director’s prayer for leave, with the policy need under the CDDA 1986 to protect the public at large.
You can read the full article, here.