1.
Concept
· Doctrine of ultra vires deals with
the consequences of actions which exceed to the limits which are mentioned in
the MOA of the company.
· MOA is the basic constitution and
basic charter of the company that is the document which describe the scope of
company action so that is the binding document of company.
· So, if any actions exceed either by
the any member of the company, its director or shareholder to the mention limit
of MOA refers as the act of ULTRA VIRES.
2. Meaning & word derivation.
The expression ultra vires is the
combination of two words
Ultra and vires.
Ultra ‘’meaning ‘’beyond
And vires ‘’meaning ‘’ power
So, ultra vires ‘’meaning ‘’ that beyond the power
3.
Definition.
When company or the members of company either director or shareholder commit any action which exceeds to the authority of the MOA then that is referred as Ultravires.
4. Purpose of doctrine of ultra vires.
1.
That protect the interest of shareholders
2.
That protect the interest of creditors
3.
That maintains check and balance on the
working of the Director.
5.
Situation /condition for the
implementation of doctrine of ultra vires.
· The doctrine of ultra vires implement
when
1. When the any action are commit which
beyond the object limit of the company which are mentioned in the MOA.
2. WHEN the company or the director of
the company commit any act or enter into any contract which exceed to the
authority of MOA.
6.
Features of doctrine of ultra vires.
1. 1. Fundamental rule of company law.
· Doctrine of ultra vires acts as the
fundamental rule of company law because that acts as in the result of the
contravention of the MOA.
· Because MOA is the basic constitution
of the company which mentioned all the rights and liabilities of company and
its members so if any contravention is happen against these mentioned limits
than that’s discuss doctrine elaborate that what would be the penalties for the
violators and steps taking against him so, that’s why act as the fundamental
rule of company law.
2. 2. Relation between S.H AND B.O.D and company.
· As doctrine of ultra vires implement
as In the result of the contravention of the MOA and MOA is the major document
of the company that deals with the relations ,dealings of the matters of
company with its members and members to members [shareholder and board of
director ]
· So as implement in the result of the
contravention of the MOA and as MOA deals with the relation between S.H AND
B.O.D so that’s discussed doctrine also deals with such type of relations.
3. 3. Not binding on company /ultra vires
contract is not bound.
· The all ultra vires contract are made
by the company either by company and its director is void and not binding on
the company.
· Logic.
Because that’s doctrine implement in as the result of the contravention
/violation of the MOA which is the basic document /constitution of the company
so if anything is against the constitution of the company then how that can be
legal and binding on company .
4. 4.Ultra vires contract cannot be ratified.
· The all ultra vires
contract made by the company either by company or its director cannot be
ratified by anyone in company otherwise in the result of the violation of MOA
and the person who ratify that will be personally liable for his action and all
possible consequences .
· Logic.
· Because that’s doctrine implement in as the result of the contravention /violation of the MOA which is the basic document /constitution of the company so if anything is against the constitution of the company then how that can be legal and ratify
5.Limit the company.
Doctrine of ultra vires limit zed the company
to do any act which is exceed to the object of the company which are specified
in the MOA of the company so, to attain this purpose perform 2 things .
1.
That restraint from the use of force for the other purpose which are not
specified in MOA.
2.
And that restraint from carrying the trade which are not specified in
MOA.
6. 6. Protect investor.
· In company investor are basically the
shareholder who invest in the business of company to earn /gain profit as the
result of the business of company
· So to gain profit that is require
that the object of business of company which are mentioned in MOA are followed
otherwise that would be violation and consequences of loss
· So, that’s doctrine of ultra vires
protect the interest of investor in 2 ways.
1. Firstly, if
MOA business object violate then violator would be personally liable for all
loss /consequences so the interest of investor are secure by such way.
2. Secondly, due
to fear of penalty no one violate the MOA business object of company so,
ultimately the interest of investor keep secure.
7. 7.Protect the creditor.
Creditors are those in company
1. To whom the company takes loan in crisis.
2. And to whom from which the company take loan to expend company business.
So for the valid use of that taken loan is that it’s must be used in
authorative activities not in un authorative activities like against the business object of company otherwise the doer
are personally liable so ,Doctrine of ultra vires protect the interest of
creditor by 2 ways .
1. Firstly, if the loans are used in UN
authorative use the user are personally liable to bear all consequences like
payment of loss to creditor so by such way that’s doctrine secure the interest
of creditor.
2. Secondly, due to fear of penalty no
one used loan in UN authorities use and interest of creditor secure ultimately.
7. Penalty for Ultra vires.
Any directors of company who perform
ultra vires are liable to penalty of level 3 on standard scale and personally
liable for his ultra vires action.
8. Development of ultra vires.
1. Ashbury railway carriage and iron Co.LTD vs.
Riche [1875].
A. facts.
· in that case the
object f company ‘’ Ashbury railway
carriage and iron Co.LTD’’ is mentioned in the object clause of the
memondurum of company which is that company ‘’ make and sell, or lend on hire
railway carriages and wagons, and all kinds of railway plaint, fitting, machinery
and rolling stock to carry on the business of mechanical engineers [work of manufacturing].
· So, the
director of company did /entered into contract to riches about of financing a
construction of a railway line in Belgium.
· And after making
contract all members of company ratified the contract, but later on the company
repudiated/end it.
· And after the repudiation of contract riche sued the company for breach of contract.
B. issue.
The issue is arise.
Whether the contract was valid or if not valid so whether /does
that could be ratified by the members of the company.
C.Decision.
· The decision held that the contract
was void because the object of contract was beyond the object limit of the
company which is mentioned in the MOA of company.
· And as the contract was void so how the company has the capacity to ratify the void contract.
2.Evans Vs. Brunner Mond AND company
[1921].
A. facts.
· in this case a company was
incorporated /formed for carrying of the business relevant to the manufacturing
of chemicals and that is mentioned in the object clause of the memondurum of
the company that the company has the authority to do all such business and
things for the achievements of its above mentioned objects .
· so, the director of company pass the
resolution in which give authority to distribute 100,000 /1 lakh pounds to the
reserve accounts of the such universities of UK for the purpose of scientific
research and education .
B. issue.
· The issue arise
that the resolution passed by the director its object are not mentioned in the
MOA of company so that is ultra vires resolution.
· The director proved that the company
faced great difficulty in finding train men so the purpose of resolution to
encourage the scientific training of more men so company would hold the trained
staff and that helpful for company progress.
Decision.
The decision held that the resolution was not ultra vires because the expenditure
which is authorized by the resolution was necessary for company progress [chemical
manufacture] so passing resolution was necessary for attainment of its main
object of company.
3. Attorney General vs. Mersey
Railway Co. [1907]
A. facts
· In that case there was the company
which was incorporated /formed for carrying out the hotel business.
· and that company made the contract
with any 3rd party about of the purchasing of the some furniture
,hiring servants and for maintaing of omnibus
· And such type of dealing of company
like purchasing furniture etc. is not clearly mentioned in the object clause of
the memondurum of the company.
B. issue
· the issue arise that
The deal of director of about buy of such items is ultra vires or whether
such transition is ultra vires.
C. decision.
·
the
decisiosn held that as there is not any detail about of the such disputed transaction
of the company re mentioned in the MOA of company and even though the object of
company are to carrying out the hotel business
· So such transition of buy furniture,
hire servants and maintain omnibus to attend and receive the guest of hotel at
railway station its seems reasonable and necessary to fulfill purpose /object
of company.
· Thus the transaction of company is
not ultra vires.
8. 9. Legal consequences.
When proof that something is done against the given authority of MOA then
doctrine of ultra vires implement.
1. 1.Injunction.
· injunction ‘’meaning ‘’ to
stop/restrain something
· So, when proof that something is done
which is beyond the authority so that will be inject here by implementation of
doctrine of ULTRA VIRES.
2. 2.Personally liability of directors.
and as director not perform its function
within his given authority he exceed to his authority so now company would not liable
he would be personally liable for his action consequences .
3. 3.Ultra vires contract.
· so if any contract made by any
director or company itself ,that contract personal liability impose on maker
not on company because of this doctrine implementation .
· because
1. Ultra vires contract are void because
of contravention of MOA.
2. And ultra vires contract cannot be
ratified because ratification itself the violation of MOA.
4. Acquire of property.
· Here acquire ‘’meaning ‘’ purchase
· Here, there are 2 consequences.
1.
Before payment.
So, if any director of the company buys any property by exceeding his
authority and payment is not made of such buy property then that transaction
can be simply cancelled by the company.
2.
After payment.
Here there are 3 consequences.
1.
Firstly, if director buy any property and payment can also be made the
company can ratify such action and can hold property on its behalf.
2.
Secondly, not ratify the transaction so buyer would be personally liable
about payment not company.
3.
But if that transaction is fraud ‘’ means made by director and company also
involved so both parties would be liable.
5 5. Ultra vires torts.
Here there are two consequences.
1.
By good faith in official duty.
If the shareholder,
director or the member of the company commit any tort /civil wrong in their official
duty but in good faith so in that case company would be liable for their wrong.
2.
By bad faith in official duty.
If the shareholder,
director or the member of the company commit any tort /civil wrong in their
official duty but in bad faith then in that case they would be personally liable
9. 10. Conclusion.
after all of the above discussion we can conclude that doctrine of ultra
vires play a vital role to regulate the affairs of company with its members and
members to members by imposing personal liability on them because of their any
exceed authority act so doctrine of Ultra vires is good to secure the interest
of shareholder, creditor and maintain check and balance on company affairs.
.
.jpg)
0 Comments