Crisis Management

Contents
Acknowledgement ........................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 2

Duties of Directors as stated in Section 166: ............................................................... 2

Importance of the Director in maintaining the corporate governance........................... 2

Rules & Responsibilities of Directors defined in India: ................................................. 3

Rules & Responsibilities of Directors defined outside India: ........................................ 5

Adequacy of legal and regulatory measures adopted to ensure fulfilment of

responsibilities by Directors ............................................................................................. 7

Regulatory provisions .................................................................................................. 7

Liability of Directors ................................................................................................... 10

Effectiveness of Enforcement mechanism to deal with the implementation realties ...... 12

Om Prakash Khaitan vs Shree Keshariya Investment Ltd (1 March, 1977) ............... 12

Gautam Kanoria vs Assistant Registrar Of Companies (12 January, 1999) .............. 13

Judicial Approaches to deal with problem with the help of High Courts and Supreme
Court Judgments ........................................................................................................... 15

Tarlok Chand Khanna And Another vs Raj Kumar Kapoor And Others, 1983 54
CompCas 12 Delhi, ILR 1982 Delhi156, Delhi High Court ..................................... 15

Role of Business/Industry Associations......................................................................... 17

Role of NGOs/Civil Society Groups ............................................................................... 18

Role of Legal Education and Awareness....................................................................... 20

Conclusions and Suggestions ....................................................................................... 21

References .................................................................................................................... 23

Page 1 of 23
 Crisis Management

Introduction
Directors of a company perform multifunctional roles with respect to the company
functioning. Being industry experts, they are hired by companies to perform certain roles
in the organization yet they do not directly serve the interest of the company. They
rather serve interest of the shareholders. In real terms, they can be regarded as the
company officers.

The working of a company is primarily dependent on two of its bodies– (i) shareholders
and (ii) board of directors. Management of a company is accountable to its board of
directors. The board decides on the strategic and operational decisions of the company.
The board makes sure the company is meeting its statutory obligations. In a nutshell,
board complies with its duties towards the company and at the same time manages its
day to day business. In addition, it performs its duties towards the shareholders & all
other company dealings.

Duties of Directors as stated in Section 166:

1. Duty of good faith - to act honestly within the interest of the company
2. Duty of reasonable care – Not liable for mere error of judgement
3. Duty to attend board meetings – Although not bound to attend, his absence may
be deemed to be vacated if he fails to attend meeting for a period of consecutive
3 months
4. Duty not to delegates – With a few exceptions, the directors should perform their
functions personally and not to delegate them to other persons
5. Duty to disclose interest – He is liable to disclose any contract he entered on
behalf of the company
6. To file returns of allotments
7. To disclose receipt of compensation from the transfer of property and shares
8. To convene annual & extraordinary general meetings

Importance of the Director in maintaining the corporate governance

With Globalization unfathomably expanding the offer of exchange, the size, the
multifaceted nature of organizations, and the administrations built to endeavor to control
it, the significance of corporate administration and inside direction has been intensified

Page 2 of 23
 Crisis Management

as it turns out to be progressively hard to manage remotely. Also, the role played by the
directors has been the subject of much consideration of late.

Corporate governance is simply the way an organization defines its policy. To put it
plainly, it is a strategy for administering the organization like a sovereign state, instating
its own traditions, approaches and laws to its representatives from the most elevated to
the least levels. Corporate governance is expected to expand the responsibility of your
organization and to evade monstrous debacles before they can actually happen. First
rate corporate administration ought to be like a police officer inside undertakings unit,
removing and disposing of issues with extraordinary preference. An organization can
likewise hold gatherings with inner individuals, for example, investors and debtholders -
and additionally providers, clients and group pioneers, to address the demand and
needs of the influenced parties. The board likewise guarantees that the organization
keeps up great corporate administration hones by rendering to responsibility, interests
of partners, honesty, moral conduct, responsiveness, revelation and
straightforwardness as specified a piece of their obligations.

Rules & Responsibilities of Directors defined in India:

There were numerous judgements on the part of directors and the duty of
executives/Board of Directors in India. In Private Limited Companies or the Public
Companies, the part and obligation of the Directors or the Board of Directors rely on the
controls in the Articles of the Company and the arrangements of the Companies Act,
1956. When it comes recorded Public Companies, different arrangements like the SEBI
rules, controls, arrangements in the posting assertion and so on merit thought it. In
Private Limited Companies or the firmly held Companies, we realize that the
organization is really keep running by the Directors and we know in the matter of how
AGM's are led in these organizations in all actuality. It may not be the situation with
regards to recorded Public Companies in perspective of different rules, controls and the
arrangements of posting understanding went into with the Stock Exchange. Directors or
the Board of Directors has a major part to play in any Company and they lead the
everyday undertakings of the Company and it may unrealistic for the AGM to offer
bearings to the Company now and again however every Company should go about

Page 3 of 23
 Crisis Management

according to the arrangements of the Companies Act, 1956 and certain choices must be
taken by the Shareholders in the Annual General Body Meeting (AGM).

In India, the organizations demonstration, 1956 endeavored to really characterize the

Directors position. It is just said in section 2(13) that director incorporated any individual
involving the position of the executive, by whatever name called. The present Act says
in section 2(34) that an executive means a director delegated to the Board of an
organization. The governing body or Board, in connection to an organization, implies the
aggregate group of directors of the organization. As it were, "Executives are portrayed
as operators, in some cases as trustees and at times as overseeing directors. In any
case, each of these articulation is utilized not as thorough of their forces and
obligations, but rather as demonstrating helpful perspectives from which they may for
the minute and for the specific object be considered."

The obligations and duties of directors stipulated by the Indian Companies Act of 2013,
can comprehensively be arranged into the accompanying two classes:

1.The obligations and liabilities which empower and advance the sincerest speculation
of the best endeavors of directors in the productive and reasonable corporate
administration, in giving exquisite and quick resolutions of different business-related
issues including those which are raised through "warnings", and in taking completely
develop and astute choices to turn away pointless dangers to the organization.

2.Fiduciary obligations which guarantee and secure that the executives of organizations
dependably stay with the interests of the and its partners, ahead or more their very own
advantages.

The above Act likewise demonstrates that each recorded organization must contain no
less than 33% of the aggregate size of its directors, as the autonomous executives; and
it additionally enables the Government of India to incorporate different classes of
organizations inside the extent of this arrangement or necessity (Section 149 of the CA-
2013). Open constrained organizations composited according to the previous CA-1956,
are allowed a change time of one year for making strict consistence with this
compulsory arrangement.

Page 4 of 23
 Crisis Management

It is very clear from above representations that the CA-2013 truly tries to make the
corporate administration and administration in India rather productive, completely
responsible, straightforward, and maximally useful to all partners and related experts,
through this clever enactment over obligations and duties of executives in Indian
organizations.

Rules & Responsibilities of Directors defined outside India:

Not at all like the U.S., until the point when 2006 Board Service Providers would have
been legal in the United Kingdom. Preceding his period, the U.K. had no confinements
on the arrangement of an enterprise as an executive of another organization. In 2006, in
any case, the U.K. Organizations Act was revised to require that an organization have
no less than one executive who was a characteristic person. This arrangement was
comprehended to allow corporate directors to keep serving on organization sheets,
however just insofar as no less than one board part was a characteristic individual.

In 2015, Parliament received the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act,
which changed the Companies Act to give that "a man may not be delegated an
executive of an organization unless the individual is a characteristic individual." Existing
non-normal individual directors of U.K. organizations initially were to be eliminated by
October 2017, however in September 2016 the U.K. government inconclusively delayed
usage of the boycott. It did as such altogether that the administration could consider
allowing exemptions in restricted conditions, as approved by the statute. As of this
written work (late spring 2017), the legislature has not yet characterized the extent of
such special cases or the circumstances in which they will be in all actuality, yet activity
was normal sooner rather than later.

In the UK, an overseeing executive is generally connected to the part of a CEO. The
parts are comparable and to some degree the same, the main distinction being the
corporate title.

An overseeing executive regulates the execution of the organization all in all and after
that has the obligation to report back to the administrator or top managerial staff. The
overseeing executive likewise has the part to report their advance so the board can
assess it to check whether targets have been accomplished.

Page 5 of 23
 Crisis Management

In Japan, under the organizations' demonstration (Act No. 86 of July 26, 2005)
characterizes the obligations of the executive as:

1.Deciding the execution of the operations of the Company with Board of Directors

2.Supervising the execution of the obligations by executives

3.Board of executives may not appoint the choice on the execution of essential
operations, for example, the accompanying issues to different workers.

4.Article 364 aside from when there is assignment by an investors meeting in

accordance with the arrangements of that article, the top managerial staff may assign a
man to speak to the Company with Board of Directors regarding the activities under that
article.

In China, each business set up, regardless of whether residential or remote, is required
to have a legitimate agent. The PRC Company Law does not force any limitations on
the nationality of the lawful delegate and the chose individual could viably be the
occupant of any nation; he/she is likewise not required to live in China. Under the
Company Law, the legitimate agent might be the administrator of the top managerial
staff, official director (if there is no top managerial staff), or the general director. In any
case, the choice of legitimate delegate differs relying upon the structure of the
organization.

The PRC Company Law does not plainly characterize the forces of a legitimate
delegate. Be that as it may, plainly a lawful delegate is approved to play out all
demonstrations with respect to the general organization of an organization as indicated
by the organization's points and destinations. This may include:

1.Acting (lawfully) to preserve the organization's benefits;

2.Executing forces of lawyer for the organization's sake;

3.Authorizing legitimate portrayal of and prosecution by the organization;

4.Executing any legitimate exchanges that are inside the nature and extent of that
organization's business.

Page 6 of 23
 Crisis Management

Adequacy of legal and regulatory measures adopted to

ensure fulfilment of responsibilities by Directors
Regulatory provisions
Various provisions have been made in the law to ensure that the directors are able to
perform their duties and responsibilities in effective manners. Some of the provisions are
as follows:

1. Section 165 of the Companies Act provides that no person shall be a director or
alternate director in more than 20 companies. Out of these, the maximum number
of public companies cannot exceed 10.For computing this limit of public
companies, directorships in a private company that is a holding or subsidiary
company of a public company shall be included. Members of a company may
specify for any lesser number of companies in which its director may act as a
director by a special resolution.
2. Quorum for a Board Meeting shall be 1/3rd of its total strength or two directors,
whichever is higher. For this purpose, procedure given in section 174 has to be
complied with.
3. Draft Rules 12.1 and 12.2 provide for procedure for attendance by a Director
through Video Conferencing or other Audio Visual Means, Draft Rule 12.3 provides
for passing resolution by circulation.
4. Under Section 179 the Board is entitled to exercise all such powers and to do all
such acts and things as the company is authorized to do under the Act,
Memorandum and Articles of Association of the company. Draft Rule 12.6 give list
of powers which the Board of Directors can exercise.
5. However, section 180 of the Act places certain restrictions on the powers of the
Board that relate to borrowings, investment, disposal of company’s undertakings
etc. These powers can be exercised within the limitation specified in the Special
Resolution of the Company.
6. Sections 181 to 183 provide for contribution, which the Board of any Public or
Private Company can make subject to certain restrictions, to following institutions:

Page 7 of 23
 Crisis Management

(i) Contributions to bona fide charitable and other funds: Prior permission of the
company in General Meeting will be required if such amount exceeds 5% of
average net profits for the preceding 3 financial years.
(ii) Contributions to recognised Political Parties: Such contribution cannot be made
by a Government Company or by a company which is in existence for less than
3 financial years. Such contribution cannot exceed 7.5% of the average net
profits of proceeding 3 financial years.
(iii) Contribution to National Defence Fund or any other fund approved by the
Central Government for the purpose of national defence. The company has to
disclose details of such contribution in its profit & loss account.
7. Disclosure of Interest by Directors. Section 184 of the Act provides for disclosure
of interest by every director. He has to disclose his interest in any company,
corporate body, Firm, LLP, or other association of Individuals and his
shareholding(exceeding the limit of 2% specified in section 184(2)in the prescribed
manner. It is also provided that he cannot participate in the meeting where any
contract or arrangement is considered.
8. Loans to Directors. Section 185 of the new Act provides that no advance or loan
can be given by a public or private company, directly or indirectly, to its director,
his relative, partner or any associate concern in which he is interested. Similarly,
the company shall provide no guarantee or any security in connection with any
loan taken by him or such person. However, the above provision shall not apply
to:
(i) Any loan given to a managing or whole-time director if such loan is given as
part of service condition as are applicable to all its employees or is pursuant
to a scheme approved by members by a special Resolution.
(ii) Any loan given by the company, which in the ordinary course of its business
provides loans or gives guarantees or security, provided the interest
charged is not a rate less than the Bank Rate declared by RBI.
9. Restriction on Non-Cash Transactions with Directors (Section 192).
These provisions are as under:

Page 8 of 23
 Crisis Management

(i) A Director of the Company or its holding, subsidiary or associate or a person

connected with him shall not acquire any asset for consideration other than
cash without complying with the procedure stated in the section;
(ii) Similarly, the Company cannot acquire any asset from the above persons
for consideration other than cash without complying with the provisions of
the Section;
(iii) For the above purpose, the following procedure should be followed:
(a) Prior approval of the members in the General Meeting of the Company
is to be obtained;
(b) If the director or the connected person is a director of the holding
company, prior approval of the members of the holding company in the
General Meeting is to be obtained;
(c) The notice of the above General Meetings should include particulars of
the arrangement and also valuation of the assets to be acquired by the
Registered Valuer;
(iv) The arrangement entered into by the Company in contravention of this
section shall be voidable at the instance of the company under certain
circumstances specified in Section 192(3).
10. Prohibition on forward dealings in Securities by Key-Managerial Personnel:
Section 194 provides that a Director of a Company shall not buy in the company
or in its holding, subsidiary or associate Company certain kinds of future contracts,
specified in Section 194 (1), in relation to securities of the company or its group
companies. If such persons enter into any such transactions, they will have to
surrender the same to the company as provided in Section 194(3).
11. Prohibition on Insider Trading of Securities (Section 195): It provides that no
director shall enter into Insider Trading. This provision will not apply to any
communication required in the ordinary course of business, profession, or
employment or under any law.

Page 9 of 23
 Crisis Management

Liability of Directors

Regardless of the controls, law additionally accommodates common/criminal liabilities

and disciplines with the goal that the Directors don't go astray from their obligations and
duties regarding individual increases. A portion of the liabilities according to different
areas are given as:

1.Liability as "Officer in Default"

Under Companies Act 2013, executives might be held at risk as "officers" of the
organization. Executives are at risk as officers in default under all areas where particular
punishment is accommodated each officer in default. Where no particular punishment is
given under the Act, they are subject under Section 450.

2.Liability for "Misrepresentation"

A director can likewise be made at risk for misrepresentation under section 447. Any
individual who is discovered liable of extortion, might be culpable with detainment for a
term which should not be under a half year but rather which may stretch out to ten years.
They should likewise be subject to fine which might not be not as much as the sum
associated with the misrepresentation, yet which may stretch out to three times the sum
engaged with the extortion.

3.Disclosure of enthusiasm by Director

Section 184 of the Act accommodates divulgence of enthusiasm by each director. On the
off chance that any director contradicts this arrangement, he will be culpable with
detainment for a term that may stretch out to one year or with least fine of Rs.50000/ -
which may reach out to Rs. 1 lac or with both.

4.Insider Trading
Forbiddance on Insider Trading of Securities (Section 195) gives that any individual
negating the arrangements of the section might be culpable with detainment for a term
up to 5 years or with a base fine of Rs.5 lacs which may stretch out to Rs.25 crores or

Page 10 of 23
 Crisis Management

three-times the measure of benefits made out of insider exchanging whichever is higher
or with both.

5.Liability of non-official/Independent Directors

An autonomous director and a non-official executive not being promoter or key
administrative staff, might be held at risk, just in regard of such demonstrations of
exclusion or commission by an organization which had happened with his insight,
attributable through Board forms, and with his assent or intrigue or where he had not
acted industriously.

6.Personal Liability
Executives can be made actually at risk
•When the executives go into contract in their own particular name.
•When they go into contracts in the interest of organization yet neglects to utilize "LTD.
Or, on the other hand PVT LTD."
•When executives surpass their powers
•If a solitary director goes into an agreement in the interest of organization unless the
BOD approves.

7.Civil Liability for misquote in plan

Under Section 35, where it is demonstrated that an outline has been issued with aim to
swindle the candidates for the securities of an organization (or whatever other individual
or for any deceitful reason), each individual concerned might be by and by mindful, with
no restriction of risk, for all or any of the misfortunes or harms that may have been brought
about by any individual who subscribed to the securities on the premise of such plan.

Page 11 of 23
 Crisis Management

Effectiveness of Enforcement mechanism to deal with the

implementation realties

The laws and provisions mentioned above ensure that the directors fulfil their duties and
responsibilities effectively, but directors may also be exempt from such penalties and
liabilities as provided in the following cases:

Om Prakash Khaitan vs Shree Keshariya Investment Ltd (1 March, 1977)

Facts of the case:

1. OM Prakash Khaitan, Solicitor, who was a Director of Shree Keshariya

Investment Limited amid the material time frame, looks for alleviation under
Section 633 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act'), from risk
emerging out of various defaults and breaks conferred by the Company, on
the ground that since November 26, 1974 he stopped to be the Director of the
Company ; that he was a Director of the Company by ideals of being its lawful
consultant and never took any dynamic part in the administration and the
issues of the Company; that he was on the Board of various Companies all
things considered legitimate guide however has not worried about the
everyday issues of the Company or its administration; and that he has
dependably acted genuinely and sensibly and has given appropriate
exhortation to the administration to act as per law in connection to issues that
were brought before the Board.
2. The application is restricted by the different experts, including the Registrar of
Companies, fundamentally on the ground that by prudence of being a Director
of the Company the candidate was at risk for the different defaults and breaks
of which the Company was liable and that if the solicitor acted sincerely or the
ruptures and defaults were submitted despite the endeavors of the applicant
unexpectedly the candidate would be released from commitment in proper
procedures and there was, in this way, no ground to mitigate the candidate of
the obligation in the present procedures.

Page 12 of 23
 Crisis Management

Judgment

Having respect to the way that the applicant has been a Director of the Company, as
undoubtedly of various different Companies, by excellence of being a specialist and did
not take an interest in the administration of the Company and had no money related
contribution in it. Court soothes the solicitor of the obligation emerging out of breaks and
defaults.

Gautam Kanoria vs Assistant Registrar Of Companies (12 January, 1999)

Facts of the case:

1. The applicants who are directors of the New City of Bombay Manufacturing Co.
Ltd., have favored this appeal to under Section 633(2) of the Companies Act,
1956 ('the Act'). The respondents issued a show-cause see dated 10-8-1992, to
the solicitors approaching the applicants to indicate cause with reference to why
they ought not be indicted for not holding the yearly broad meeting in regard of
the money related year finishing 30-6-1983, and from that point up to the
budgetary year finishing 1991 as likewise of documenting yearly returns for the
year finishing 31-12-1986, and from that point up to the year 1991. In the interest
of the company indicate cause was appeared by letter dated 1-10-1992.
2. In the answer it is brought up that the administration of the company was
assumed control in accordance with the Textile Undertakings (Taking Over of
Management) Ordinance, 1983, which was distributed in the Central Gazette on
18-10-1983. The said Ordinance has from there on been supplanted by an Act. It
is additionally called attention to that in perspective of the over the directors can't
release their protests under the Companies Act, 1956, for the reasons outside
their ability to control. Despite the answer to the said indicate cause see the
solicitors catching that they will be indicted for infringement of the arrangements
of the Companies Act have moved toward this Court by this request of recorded
under Section 633(2).
3. An sworn statement was recorded for the benefit of the respondents. It is the
conflict of the respondents that this Court in some different procedures have held
that the forces of the High Court under Section 633(2) ought to be sparingly

Page 13 of 23
 Crisis Management

utilized and the officers of the company can't, as an issue of right, guarantee that
criminal procedures ought to be founded against them for the defaults
perpetrated by them.

Judgement

On a thought of the realities argued by the solicitors in this no uncertainty they are in
fact in default of the arrangements of the Companies Act. Be that as it may, in their
answer to the show-cause see and in addition in the appeal to they have called
attention to that they have been not able hold the yearly broad meeting or record returns
for the reasons outside their ability to control. In these conditions, it is conceivable to
acknowledge the supplication that they have acted sincerely and sensibly.
Consequently, are not held at risk for the defaults conferred.

Page 14 of 23
 Crisis Management

Judicial Approaches to deal with problem with the help of

High Courts and Supreme Court Judgments

Removal of Permanent Directors:

Tarlok Chand Khanna And Another vs Raj Kumar Kapoor And Others, 1983 54
CompCas 12 Delhi, ILR 1982 Delhi156, Delhi High Court

It is possible that in the Article of a company a person has given the status of Permanent
Director. Such instances are generally observed in cases where family owned business
have been converted into Companies. Although, the said person has been assigned a
permanent position in the article of the company, such a person can be removed if it is
not in the interests of shareholders that the person be a part of the Company Board.

The court observed:

“23. The question still remains, if Khanna, a permanent director of the company, could
have been removed by the company in a general meeting in spite of the provision in the
articles. If neither of the two meetings were valid, because Khanna had no notice of these,
even though he was intended to be removed from the board, his removal is bad in law
irrespective of the way one looks at the power of the company in a general meeting to
remove a permanent director, who is appointed as such by name in the articles. I would,
however, consider the question since was raised. No doubt, Khanna was a permanent
director named in art. 10 to hold office for life. In terms of art. 14, he also had a right during
his life time to nominate his successor on the board in the event of his death. He could,
nevertheless, be removed under s. 284 of the Act. Section 284 is based on s. 184 of the
English Act and applies to all types of companies, public and private, and the only
exceptions are those that are built into the section itself. A person appointed as a life
director by the articles or by any agreement is, nevertheless, removable by the company
in general meeting and has no security of tenure in office. While the shareholders have
no power, apart from that given in the statute or the articles, to intervene in the

Page 15 of 23
 Crisis Management

management of the company's affairs, this section was designed to enable them to control
the directors by their removal. The only exceptions are the directors appointed by the
Central Govt. under s. 408, and life directors holding office on April 1, 1952. The only
other exceptions are nominee directors of financial institutions, with which we are not
concerned. No doubt, art. 14 empowers a permanent director to nominate a director to
take his place after his death, but even that does not save the tenure from the operation
of s. 284. True, s. 184 of the English Act specifically exclude the operation of articles
which s. 284 does not, but that was not necessary in view of the scheme of the Indian
Act, because s. 9 of the act provides that the provisions of the Act would have effect,
notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the articles of the company. No
further provisions for exclusion of provisions in the articles to the contrary was necessary.
Khanna could have, therefore, been removed, if the requirements of s. 284 and of a valid
meeting had been satisfied. This was, however, of no avail; because as observed earlier,
the proceedings of the meetings which led to removal were invalid the absence of notice
to Khanna either of the proposed motion, or of the proposed meeting of the Board and
the extraordinary general meeting of the company. The effect, therefore, is that Khanna
continues to be a permanent director notwithstanding his purported removal from the
Board.”

Page 16 of 23
 Crisis Management

Role of Business/Industry Associations

SEBI’s role in checking the directors’ duties comes in the form of its legislation to
prevent insider trading which is a violation of fiduciary duty of the all company directors.
SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 2015 has come into force with
effect from 15th May, 2015 after having been gazette on 15th January, 2015.

The prior Company Law which was made in the year 1956 did not have any
arrangements to address the insider trading however the new company law that is
made on 2013 has arrangements to address the Insider Trading in section 195. It is
cited in the section as takes after: No individual including any executive or key
administrative work force of a company might go into insider trading. Given that nothing
contained in this sub-section should apply to any correspondence required in the
customary course of business or calling or some other law. However, the SEBI direction
had the arrangements for Insider trading in the two its 1992 and 2015. There are a few
definitions, tenets and disciplines that are diverse in both. For instance, The Companies
Act, 2013 states about the 'non-open value touchy data' and the Regulation states
about 'unpublished value delicate data.'

India is ready to wind up noticeably a financial power house sooner rather than later.
The greater part of the corporate biggies are anticipating India as an incredible score for
extending their business. Consequently, the lawful structure to help the money related
and business frameworks ought to be very much surrounded. The picture of India is not
anticipated pleasingly by having the laws for only purpose of having them and revising
them later just when the need emerges. The demonstrations and laws confined ought
not be clashing and ought to be down to earth and pragmatic to the most extreme
degree conceivable. In the meantime, the laws ought not be casual for the guilty parties
to circumvent disposing of the liabilities. The laws ought to guarantee that the
executives who go about as a spine to the companies ought to be on their toes and they
themselves actualize them appropriately.

Page 17 of 23
 Crisis Management

Role of NGOs/Civil Society Groups

The procedure of democratization, mechanical change and financial advancement, in
the course of recent decades have prompted development in assorted variety, number,
reach and impact of common society systems and associations. It ranges from
transnational coalitions to universal ngos to exchange unions with the help of
remarkable interchanges limit however the worldwide media and web. They incorporate
indigenous people groups gatherings, human rights advancement associations,
magnanimous establishments, strategy think-tanks and research organizations. They
more often than not work independently and in addition all in all at different levels of
society and affect individuals' lives running from political, social, monetary, social and
social equality and commitments.

The NGOs take up a wide assortment of parts at the national, provincial, group and
worldwide level, some of which are said beneath:

1. Analysis, Advocacy and mindfulness raising-They draw out the worries of the
general population both on a self-named premise and in addition on a delegate
premise. They explore, break down and illuminate people in general about issues
utilize media crusades to prepare natives, and anteroom business pioneers and
policymakers.
2. Brokerage-They go about as a delegate between different divisions and
gatherings.
3. Conflict determination Also go about as a mediator and facilitator
4. Capacity building – give instruction, preparing and data
5. Delivery of administrations – conveyance of fundamental philanthropic; and
social administrations
6. Evaluation and observing – it fills in as a guard dog or a free evaluator of
government and corporate execution and investigates responsibility and
straightforwardness.

Despite the fact that there is an awesome approval in the middle of various sorts of
segment, company and nation and different sorts of NGOs, yet in countless the
movement of NGOs are staffing to impact corporate choices , notoriety, hazard

Page 18 of 23
 Crisis Management

administration, incomes, cost and social permit to work. NGO additionally impacts the
rise of new plans of action, new corporate responsibility instruments and institutional
structures, cross-segment partnerships and changes openly arrangement condition or
conditions under which numerous ventures work.

Battling NGOs and exchange unions have assumed an essential part in changing
desires of society of business by impacting the selections of customers, workers,
financial specialists, controllers, and the overall population. The quantity of open battles
in the previous decade have developed strikingly in degree, number and effect in light of
the expanded reach of media and web, developing open mindfulness past individuals'
prompt group or the developing achieve, impact, energy of business itself.

Because of expanded battles by NGOs, many organizations are confronting expanded

weight from different partners so they exhibit great exhibitions in monetary outcomes,
advertise development and rivalries and furthermore expanded corporate
administration. In light of the present weight, the thoughts of company obligation and
company citizenship square measure proceeding onward the far side the limits of
legitimate consistence, PR and 'pleasant to-do' budgetary guide, to end up plainly extra
key to company system, hazard administration and duty.

Page 19 of 23
 Crisis Management

Role of Legal Education and Awareness

Regularly it was discovered that, blameless officials get associated with infringement of
Directors Duties. They may have don't deliberately abuse these laws, yet because of
absence of lawful instruction and mindfulness, they wind up overstepping the law and
perpetrating a wrongdoing.

For example, Michael Schachter, who is an accomplice in Willkie Farr, distributed one
such case in the New York Law Journal and Gallagher's prosecution office and co-
leader of the association's clerical criminal resistance rehearse gathering. Overall,
Robert Moffat for IBM, was blamed for releasing critical data to Danielle Chiesi, who
was working at New Castle Partners fence investments. Danielle exchanged on the
data and Moffat inevitably confessed and got a prison sentence of half year.
Nevertheless, his lawyers contended that he was not at risk for the episode in light of
the fact that there was never any sort of individual advantage. The contention didn't
work out for him and the court held Moffat obligated for the entire occurrence.

On the opposite side, Schachter additionally refers to the Supreme Court's choice in
Dirks v. SEC. For this situation the court chose that if a man by botch reveals some data
of material, non-open data, it doesn't really imply that he has broken the insider's trustee
obligations.

He additionally refers to the case SEC v. Switzer. For this situation, Barry Switzer, who
was a previous football mentor at the University of Oklahoma's, exchanged on data he
got notification from George Platt, who filled in as the CEO of Texas International, when
they met at a track and field competition meet in secondary school. The court decided
that he didn't break his trustee obligations and this additionally made Switzer not at risk
for the entire occasion.

In this way we see two unique cases where the denounced erroneously discloses
imperative company data to a pariah. The decision was distinctive in both the cases
however it demonstrates that one can be held obligated for even by chance being
associated with insider trading and the same goes for any kind of infringement of
director obligations.

Page 20 of 23
 Crisis Management

Conclusions and Suggestions

Directors' part is significantly something beyond being a figure leader of the partnership.
There is positively no qualification amongst official and non-official chiefs in any event
under the watchful eye of law and with respect to their obligations and liabilities.
Tolerating the position of Director is tolerating the duty of applying their abilities,
judgment, thinking, addressing aptitudes, involvement in the related field for the
advantage of the organization no matter what. It is straightforward for the law to keep
the strengths of the boss to take decision there by restricting their powers to abuse their
position however this makes the position of administrators meaning less. That is the
reason a significant measure of care has been taken while encompassing Companies
Act, 1956 and the starting late enclosed Companies Act, 2013 fuse a lot of game plans
for the boss to act uninhibitedly as risk taking is a fundamental of the business. The
show requires that the officials should act with sole method of reasoning of benefitting
the association. Despite the likelihood that their decisions swing to be disaster making
to the association the boss are not in danger if their sole manner of thinking was to
benefit the association and they have acted in deliberateness with their experience and
capacities. This is extraordinarily critical in todays' business field where the business
divisions are to a great degree feeble and chance taking has transformed into a basic of
cooperating. Directors ought to likewise know that the laws and acts are confined to
check in the event that they are acting against the enthusiasm of the organization on
whose board they are in to profit the organizations in which the chiefs being referred to
hold enthusiasm for. Chiefs, official or non-official must act inside their forces portrayed
both in the demonstration and furthermore in the articles of affiliation and at any cost
ought not cross the limits set to their forces. On the off chance that at all such an activity
happens and prompts misfortune the Directors are considered totally by and by in
charge of the misfortune and is recuperated from their own benefits. The chiefs ought
not hold positions that come in struggle with the enthusiasm of the organization or they
ought not hold positions in the opponent or contending organizations. This may prompt
exclusion and culpable if kept mystery. The courts of the country play out a test called
target test in examples of officials having a hopeless circumstance or mishandling their
vitality and position. In this test the court goes up against the position of a regular man

Page 21 of 23
 Crisis Management

and looks boss to check whether he has acted solely to benefit the association with no
inclination to benefit him or his relations at the cost of the association. Court will in like
manner consider subjective parts while playing out this objective test. These subjective
segments will consolidate parts like comprehension, judgment, aptitudes et cetera. This
is absolutely what has happened in the Australian Centro case.

Every official according to the law is required to have a basic learning of the business
he is in. He is completely anticipated that he would have a scrutinizing psyche and see
and ought to experience the reports and us his watchfulness before making any record.
He can depend on the guidance of experts like designers, examiners, bookkeepers,
legal counselors however he can't get away from the obligation. He claims the duty
regarding the data they give. That is the reason he should utilize his best judgment
while picking his consultants.

Directors are required to maintain a strategic distance from conceivable irreconcilable

circumstance to most extreme degree. South African law expresses that when a chief
acknowledges a place of duty on the board it is understood that he puts the
organization's enthusiasm before individual intrigue and this need not be expressed
independently. On the off chance that there emerges any irreconcilable situation while
taking any choice then he has nothing to do with the choice in regards to that issue.
Some individual intrigue express that before load up and leave the meeting quickly.
Irreconcilable circumstance is to be considered by the Directors important and the
takeover control board, organization law and SEBI directions are exceptionally strict
with respect to these issues. Corporate open door as in chiefs utilizing the open door by
and by which generally would have been utilized by the organization is entirely taken
care of by the directions.

Page 22 of 23
 Crisis Management

References
Books:
1. Introduction to Company Law – Eleventh Edition by Avtar Singh
2. Book on The Director's Handbook: Your Duties Responsibilities and Liabilities
Online resources:
3. http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/market-edge/insider-trading-sebi-must-knock-
few-heads-to-drive-message_1233505.html
4. https://indiankanoon.org/
5. https://corporateinsiderstrading.wordpress.com/category/famous-cases/
6. https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com
7. https://content.next.westlaw.com
8. http://www.brefigroup.co.uk/directors/directors_roles_and_responsibilities.html
9. International Journal of Business and Social Science Vol. 3 No. 2 [Special Issue
– January 2012] 21 Directors’ Duties and Liabilities – Where Are We Now and
Where Are We Going in the UK, Broader Commonwealth, and Internationally?
10. Indiancorporatelaws.blogspot.in
11. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unjust_enrichment
12. http://taxguru.in/company-law/directors-aware-duties-section-166-companies-act-
2013.html
13. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/feb/09/corporate-ngo-
campaign-environment-climate-change

Page 23 of 23