The directors held their last meeting on December 31 at 4:30 p.m., and it was conducted more like a party than a usual meeting. A director was negligent in signing a promissory note, which cost the corporation $15,000. Furthermore, the director was in breach of his fiduciary duty because the note was paid to a corporation in which he had an interest. Which of the following is true?
A) The shareholders could force the director to pay the $15,000 to the corporation by insisting on their pre-emptive rights.
B) If the corporation failed to start an action through its authorized agents (e.g., its directors) , no action could be taken because a corporation is merely a legal concept and must act through its authorized agents.
C) The proper plaintiffs in the action are the shareholders, under the relief from oppression provision.
D) A shareholder could commence an action on behalf of the corporation against the director if he gets the court's permission to do so.
E) The shareholders could dissent to this act and force the corporation to buy them out at fair market value.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q22: Art Raskle was an officer, director, and
Q23: Which of the following situations would allow
Q24: You have been asked by two fellow
Q25: Which of the following statements about pre-incorporation
Q26: Punam was the director of a broadly
Q28: John Hollin was an officer, director, and
Q29: Ethan got together with a number of
Q30: Which of the following attracts the dissent
Q31: A person who participates in the initial
Q32: A securities commission is
A) a provincial agency
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents