Multiple Choice
Use the fact situation in Q1 to answer the related question that follows. In this situation,assuming the company is an Ontario company,the best argument of A,B,and C in their defence of the lawsuit under both federal and Ontario legislation is that
A) on behalf of the shareholders of the company,they exercised reasonable diligence in assessing the value of Gladstone Inc.
B) the shareholders have no cause of action against them as any duty is owed to the company only.
C) they committed no breach of fiduciary duty to Multi Corp Ltd.
D) they committed no breach of fiduciary duty to the shareholders of Multi Corp Ltd.
E) on behalf of the company,they exercised reasonable diligence in assessing the value of Gladstone Inc.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q3: Canadian courts have consistently held that a
Q14: Charles,a minority shareholder in a large private
Q19: Which of the following is NOT a
Q24: Use this fact situation to answer the
Q25: In what circumstances is the appointment of
Q27: Notwithstanding legislation designed to impose duties on
Q28: In a distributing public company,auditors are appointed
Q33: Which of the following is NOT a
Q34: Qualco Lumber Ltd.owned a timber license over
Q50: What duties do directors owe to shareholders