jonttt said:
patpending said:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/legal_guidance/Annex%2520A%2520Companies%2520Act.pdf
Ref 993(1) thought that was a bit funny given it's a Porsche forum/thread ðŸ˜
Im missing something, where does that apply to shareholders :dont know:
Shadow directors yes ie in the context of Mrs Samantha mearns selling her share before taking public office when she must have known what was going on but the relevent part of that is did she continue to act as / hold herself out as a director / "assist" in business matters / benefit from the fraud. Being a shareholder does not automatically mean you are liable for that fraud, that's why companies have directors ie to direct business on behalf of the shareholders but the shareholders do not make day to day business decisions.
To clarify - nobody(inc shareholder(s) is/are automatically liable for any fraud but what is being stated is that current or former directors or shareholders of a company can also become liable if wrongdoing or criminal activity is established and people are deemed to be culpable
The proceeds of crime law is extensive and can also be used in cases where any individuals are deemed to have financially benefitted from crime, even if a crime(ie theft or fraud) may have been committed by someone else.
Dividends, company activities, patterns and disbursements etc can all be looked at in detail and if the CPS get their teeth into something people had better be squeaky clean as they have experts in this field of investigation.
If there are multiple people on a forum who suspect wrongdoing they should link up and report the matter jointly as it carries far more weight.