UK: Disqualification of non-executive director of listed company

Last Updated: 3 May 2005
Article by Tom Page and Peter Bateman

Delegation or abdication? Directors’ disqualification case examines when further questions must be asked

The trend for bringing non-executives to account for corporate failings has continued with the disqualification of a non-executive director of a former listed company who failed to deal properly with serious allegations about financial irregularities and about misconduct by the company’s finance director. In Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Swan and others [2005] All ER (D) 102 (Apr), reported this month, a senior non-executive who was deputy chairman of the board and chairman of the audit and remuneration committees of Finelist plc, and the company’s CEO, were disqualified for three and four years respectively.

But it is not all bad news for directors. The case also gave some guidance on the extent to which chief executives are entitled to rely on the other directors and managers of the business to do their job and the extent to which they ought to be aware of what their managers are doing. It also offered some welcome clarification of the steps that a director must take to verify the contents of a circular for which he has accepted responsibility.

To view the article in full please see below:

Full Article

Delegation or abdication? Directors' disqualification case examines when further questions must be asked

The trend for bringing non-executives to account for corporate failings has continued with the disqualification of a non-executive director of a former listed company who failed to deal properly with serious allegations about financial irregularities and about misconduct by the company's finance director. In Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Swan and others [2005] All ER (D) 102 (Apr), reported this month, a senior non-executive who was deputy chairman of the board and chairman of the audit and remuneration committees of Finelist plc, and the company's CEO, were disqualified for three and four years respectively.

But it is not all bad news for directors. The case also gave some guidance on the extent to which chief executives are entitled to rely on the other directors and managers of the business to do their job and the extent to which they ought to be aware of what their managers are doing. It also offered some welcome clarification of the steps that a director must take to verify the contents of a circular for which he has accepted responsibility

Background: disqualification of directors

Whenever a company goes into administrative receivership, administration or liquidation, the insolvency practitioner is required to report to the disqualification unit of the DTI on the conduct of all those who are or have been directors of the company before the commencement of the insolvency proceedings.

A director of a company which goes into formal insolvency proceedings and whose conduct makes him unfit to be involved in the management of a company in future may, by court order, be disqualified from becoming involved in the management of a company for a period of between 2 and 15 years. An application for a disqualification order can be made by the Secretary of State for the DTI within two years after the start of the insolvency proceedings. As an alternative to full disqualification proceedings, the DTI may be willing to accept an undertaking from the director which has a similar effect to a disqualification order .

Finelist plc and its directors

Finelist plc was listed on the Official List in 1994. Over the following five years it grew significantly, and by 1999 it was a leading supplier to the UK aftermarket for vehicle parts, accessories and consumer products, with 40,000 trade customers, 7 million retail customers and 7,500 employees. For that year it reported profit on ordinary activities after tax of £26 million.

In September 1991 Christopher Swan became a director of the company, and subsequently its chairman and CEO. In March 1992 Brian North became a non-executive director and later the deputy chairman of the board and chairman of the Audit and Remuneration Committees.

In April 2000 Finelist was taken over and re-registered as a private company. Six months later it went into receivership.

Disqualification proceedings

The Secretary of State originally brought disqualification proceedings against the company's CEO, Mr Swan, its finance director, Vuchuru Reddy, the marketing and purchasing director, Brian Ritchie, and the senior non-executive, Mr North. Rather than contesting the proceedings, Messrs Reddy and Ritchie gave disqualification undertakings for periods of eight and five years respectively.

Because the proceedings against Messrs Swan and North relate to their disqualification, they do not strictly concern the standard of skill and care that is expected of directors. As the improper practices which led to the disqualification proceedings were not alleged to have played any part in the company's insolvency, no claims for breach of the duty of skill and care, or breach of fiduciary duty, were brought by the receivers. However, it seems likely that had such claims been brought the court would have applied a similar analysis, so the case has a wider significance.

Cheque kiting

The Secretary of State's case was based on various instances of "cheque kiting" that took place within the group. "Cheque kiting" is the practice of exploiting the time period during which cheques clear through the banking system and the different days upon which the payee's account is credited and the payer's account is debited with the amount of any cheque. Because a payer's account is only debited once the cheque has cleared, but the payee's account may be credited immediately after the cheque is paid in, there may be a few days in which the amount of the cheque is shown to the credit of both accounts.

By arranging for different subsidiaries of the group to write matching cheques, the effect could be further exploited to artificially inflate both companies' cash positions, particularly at times when the group needed to demonstrate a healthy cash position to meet its banking covenants.

For example, between mid-November 1999 and 6 December 1999 the total artificial credit each day for the group from cheque kiting carried out between two subsidiaries in Finelist's AEW Division was £16 million.

The whistle-blower

In October 1999, Paul Reeve, who had previously been a consultant to Finelist, was appointed as its new chief operating officer. Two months later, Mr Reeve (together with a senior HR manager) attended a meeting with an operations manager in the AEW Division who was about to leave his job. He claimed that various financial and accounting irregularities were taking place, including the manipulation of financial results by the group's finance director, Mr Reddy.

As a result, Mr Reeve then met with the finance director of the AEW Division who worked under Mr Reddy. This finance director supported the claims and gave more specific details but asked that his name not be mentioned, for fear of retribution from his superiors who were implicated in the alleged misconduct.

Mr Reeve decided that the seriousness of the allegations merited them being brought to the attention of a non-executive director, and he approached Mr North as the senior non-executive director and chairman of the audit committee. What exactly was said at the meeting between Mr Reeve and Mr North was disputed, but the judge found that Mr North was at least made aware of a number of serious allegations which if true would have very serious implications for the group.

Mr North then arranged to meet Mr Swan and Mr Reddy to discuss the allegations. After a meeting which only lasted 30-40 minutes, Mr North decided not to take any further action.

Subsequently both Mr Reeve and the HR manager who attended the previous meetings were summarily dismissed. When questioned by Mr Swan, the finance director of the AEW Division denied having made any allegations.

The case against Mr North

The judge found that Mr North did not actually know about the cheque kiting policy. However, he held that Mr North's conduct in failing to investigate the serious allegations which were brought to his attention fell well short of what was expected from a director of his experience. In particular, the fact that he:

  • allowed the allegations to be dismissed after only a short meeting with the directors who were likely to be implicated;
  • made no attempt to speak to the individuals who had actually made the allegations;
  • did not inform the other non-executive directors of the allegations;
  • failed to ensure that the allegations were discussed at a board meeting in the absence of the implicated individuals;
  • did not discuss the matter with the company's auditors,

meant that he fell so far below the level of competence expected that he was unfit to be a director. The failure to do any of these things was "a very serious… lapse in judgement… at precisely the moment and in the type of situation in which decisive, courageous and independent action is required by a non-executive director". Placing the incident in the lowest category of seriousness, and taking into account other mitigating factors, the judge disqualified Mr North for three years.

The case against Mr Swan

Mr Swan, together with Mr Reddy, was one of the directors who was required to sign any cheque that exceeded £25,000 in value. In June 1999 he signed two cheques for £1 million and £4 million respectively from group company A to another group company B, and he signed two cheques for the same amounts back from company B to company A. These four cheques were cheque kiting cheques.

The judge found that there was no cogent evidence that Mr Swan actually knew that cheque kiting was taking place. He accepted that Mr Swan was "a businessman with obvious flair and drive in relation to operational matters, but he was not a person likely to pay attention to financial or accountancy technicalities or other matters of detail which he did not regard as having an obvious impact on the profit or loss of the Group".

However, even if Mr Swan did not actually know of the cheque kiting, the unusual circumstances in which the cheques were signed, which "called out for comment and enquiry", should have prompted him to ask further questions. Had he done so, the judge found that the cheque kiting policy would have come to light. In failing to make further enquiries he "wholly abdicated his responsibilities of care and control". This, and other evidence, was sufficient to demonstrate that Mr Swan ought to have been aware of a practice that he accepted was, at the very least, "commercially improper and unacceptable", and which misled investors. This made him unfit to be a director.

The judge considered Mr Swan's conduct to fall into the lowest category of seriousness and disqualified him for four years.

Mis-statements in Class 1 circular

The case against Mr Swan also revolved around a circular sent to shareholders of Finelist in July 1999 in relation to a Class 1 disposal. As required by the Listing Rules, the circular contained a statement of the group's indebtedness, a working capital statement stating that the group's working capital was sufficient for present requirements, and a standard responsibility statement that "to the best of the knowledge and belief of the directors [of Finelist] (who have taken all reasonable care to ensure that such is the case)" the information in the circular was accurate.

As a result of the cheque kiting that had been taking place, the statement of indebtedness overstated the company's cash and understated its net debts by around £8 million. The working capital statement was also based upon this incorrect information.

The Secretary of State's case was that (i) by signing the responsibility statement, Mr Swan accepted a personal and individual responsibility for the accuracy of the statements in the circular; and that (ii) certain last-minute significant changes to the cash balances in the circular should have prompted him to investigate further. Although the Secretary of State accepted that Mr Swan did not have a personal obligation to look at the group's bank statements, he contended that he should have asked further questions.

However, the judge refused to accept this case:

"Although the directors of Finelist, and Mr Swan in particular, had a personal responsibility under the Listing Rules to ensure that the information in the Circular, including the Indebtedness Statement, were correct, that personal responsibility could only in reality be discharged by doing what was reasonably practical and would have been done by any reasonably competent and experienced person in their position.

… It was not unreasonable or improper of Mr Swan, who was extremely busy with other matters, to leave to Mr Reddy, and those financial and accounting personnel and professional advisors assisting Mr Reddy, to establish or check and confirm financial details like the figures in the Indebtedness Statement, unless and until something occurred which should have alerted Mr Swan to take some personal interest in those matters. It is entirely unrealistic to suppose, for example, that it is the standard responsibility of the chairman and the chief executive of every listed company to check individual bank statements as part of a normal Class 1 transaction.

I do not accept that the late amendment of the Group's stated cash balance in the draft… Circular from £2.363m to £10.363m was something which should have caused Mr Swan to question the propriety or competence of Mr Reddy or those advising and supporting him or to alert Mr Swan that there was something seriously amiss which required his personal intervention."

In addition, Mr Swan received a reasonable explanation for the amendment, which he had "no reasonable grounds for rejecting" and which, the judge found, should not have caused him to initiate further investigations. In all the circumstances he was therefore entitled to leave the task of verifying the figures in the circular to Mr Reddy, his team and the company's advisers.


A number of lessons can be learnt from this case:

  • Non-executive directors must not allow serious allegations made by a whistleblower to be dismissed without proper investigation. This may require the non-executive to interview the whistle-blower and/or other persons involved or even to instigate a formal investigation, perhaps with the help of external advisers. Depending on the circumstances, the allegations should also be brought to the attention of other non-executives and with executives who are not implicated. Explanations given by directors who may be implicated should not be accepted without independent challenge.
  • Being asked to sign large cheques for round sums in unusual circumstances without explanation is something that ought to cause a director to make further enquiries.
  • An executive director is entitled to rely on his managers and professional advisers in relation to matters the managers/advisers are responsible for, unless and until something comes to his attention that should cause him to ask further questions.
  • Similarly, a director who questions information in a circular which another director has prepared is entitled to rely on the explanation given unless the circumstances clearly indicate that further investigation is necessary.
  • Signing a responsibility statement in connection with a Class 1 circular (or, probably, listing particulars) only creates an obligation for the director to do what is practical and to take reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of information; it does not raise the standard of skill and care expected from a director (although it may well increase the chances of the director being sued by investors). For example, a chief executive would not be personally expected to check all financial information in detail if he reasonably believes that someone else with appropriate skill and experience has done so.

This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to

Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.

The original publication date for this article was 03/05/2005.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.