Explain whether Del or Rod will be liable for either: (i) Fraudulent trading under s213 Insolvency Act 1986 (ii) Wrongful trading under s214 Insolvency Act 1986
【参考答案及解析】
(i) Because Del falsified the company's accounts, and the company is insolvent, he is likely to be guilty of intention to defraud under s213 Insolvency Act 1986. There is not enough evidence to prove Rod is guilty – the prosecution is unlikely to be able to prove he intended to defraud the creditors or others. (ii) Del will be personally liable under s214 Insolvency Act 1986 for the increase in the company's debts since it is already established that he is likely to be liable for fraudulent trading which carries a higher standard of proof. Rod will also be liable for the company's debts, since as a director of a company, he should have been aware of the situation.
(i) Because Del falsified the company's accounts, and the company is insolvent, he is likely to be guilty of intention to defraud under s213 Insolvency Act 1986. There is not enough evidence to prove Rod is guilty – the prosecution is unlikely to be able to prove he intended to defraud the creditors or others. (ii) Del will be personally liable under s214 Insolvency Act 1986 for the increase in the company's debts since it is already established that he is likely to be liable for fraudulent trading which carries a higher standard of proof. Rod will also be liable for the company's debts, since as a director of a company, he should have been aware of the situation.