← All Authorities
Singapore duty of care skill diligence s174

Lim Kok Wah v Lim Boh Yong

[2015] 5 SLR 307
JurisdictionSingapore
CourtSingapore High Court
Year2015
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Singapore High Court considered the standard of care, skill and diligence expected of directors in the discharge of their duties.

Key Principle

directors' duties; duty of care, skill and diligence; standard expected of directors

Area of Law

company

Related Cases

Shafron v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (2012) 247 CLR 465

A company secretary is an 'officer' under the Corporations Act and owes a duty of care and diligence under s 180 in performing their functions.

Bell Group Ltd (in liq) v Westpac Banking Corporation [2012] WASCA 157

Directors of an insolvent company owe duties to creditors, and bank claims may be subordinated where unconscionable conduct is established in dealings with the insolvent company.

Barclay v Penberthy (2012) 246 CLR 258

The standard of care under s 180 of the Corporations Act is that of a reasonable person in the director's position, having regard to the corporation's circumstances and the director's office.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Lim Kok Wah v Lim Boh Yong and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Lim Kok Wah v Lim Boh Yong