Twinkie, Lala and Dipsy are siblings. In order to secure the future of his brothers, Twinkie formed a company and carried out their family business.
law
Description
QUESTION
E
Twinkie, Lala and Dipsy are siblings. In
order to secure the future of his brothers, Twinkie formed a company and
carried out their family business. All three of them became members and
directors of the company. Prior to the company’s incorporation, Twinkie ordered
office furniture from Lulu. The furniture was later delivered to the company
and Lulu claimed for payment. Lala and Dipsy refused to accept the delivery and
asked Lulu to take back her furniture. Lulu was furious and insisted that the
company is liable for payment.
At the beginning of the company’s
business, Twinkie advanced an amount of RM25,000.00 to cover all the administration
expenses of the company. After several years, the company’s business grew
rapidly. Twinkie wished to have his money back. Lala and Dipsy declined his
request. According to them, the company is technically Twinkie’s since he holds
85% of the total issued shares in the company.
On 28th. August 2019, a resolution was
passed to alter the company’s constitution in respect of signatories on the
company’s cheque and account. Formerly, the constitution stated that, “any
withdrawal of money from the company’s account which exceeds the amount of
RM10,000.00, shall requires signature from THREE directors”. Under the alteration, only TWO directors need
to sign and authorise the transaction. The resolution further stated that the
alteration shall take effect THIRTY days from the date of the resolution. On
18th. September 2019, the company’s cheque for an amount of RM15,000.00 was
issued to Poh. The cheque was signed by Lala and Dipsy.
Analyse the above scenario based on the
Companies Act 2016 and relevant decided cases.
