Business and Company Law for Babybelle Pty Ltd - myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theBusiness and Company Law for Babybelle Pty Ltd. Answer: Schwartz: In the matter of Babybelle Pty Ltd (ACN 116 052 683) [2007] FCA 1469 (September 2007) The relevant facts of the case: In this case the fact is Babybelle Pty Ltd is an organization which is owned by Mr. Schwartz and also the director of the company. He has appointed another director for the company. It has been found that Mr. Schwartz has been disqualified for the failure to manage the corporation according to the regulations (du Plessis and De Koker 2017). The major legal issues: The legal issues has been found that Mr. Schwartz has been granted a leave for manage the organization under the sec- 206G of the Corporation Act 2001 (cth). However the court has been found that the application is not formed according to the terms and conditions of the organization and he also appointed another director for the company (du Plessis and De Koker 2017). Mr. Goodman is the new appointed director who was not appointed according to the terms of the company regulations. Another According to the case study, it has been found that Mr. Schwartz breaches his duty toward the office and as a solo director it is his duty to provide every services (Hiller, 2013). The organization provides the services of sports equipments, heated towel rails and spa pools. Therefore, Australian Securities and Investments Commission investigate the issue and find that he was involved with disqualifying conduct through hypothesis for dishonesty offences toward the office. However the offence has bee n committed under the sec- 206G of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (du Plessis and De Koker 2017). The relevant law relied on by the judges(s) in making their decision: According to the Adams v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (2003) case the Federal Court of Australia has been found that disqualification of any person can make threatening to the organization (Coffee, Sale and Henderson 2015). In this case, the Federal Court of Australia has mentioned that Mr. Schwartz has committed offences under the Sec- 206A (1) Corporation Act Cth). When any director of the company has been identified to disqualification under a corporation then it will granted as an offence (du Plessis and De Koker 2017). The directors has the rights to involved in the decision making process when its about the own company. The Sec- 206B (2) of the Corporation Act 2001(Cth) defines the period of disqualification (Hiller, 2013). The application which has been submitted by Mr. Schwartz has failed to prove and satisfy the court by the unsatisfactory evidences for solving the legal issues. Therefore it breaches the terms of Sec- 206A (1) and Sec- 206G of Corporation Act (Cth) of the Corporation Act 2001 (du Plessis and De Koker 2017). Here in this case Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) send reply to Mr. Schwartz trough a letter for not attending on the hearing date of the case (Hiller, 2013). The actual decision of the case: According to the case study of Schwartz: In the matter of Babybelle Pty Ltd, it has been identified that application made by Mr. Schwartz was invalid and the facts are not related with the facts. The Federal Court of Australia stated that he has breached the Sec- 206A (1) and Sec- 206G of Corporation Act (Cth) and found guilty for committing the offences (Hiller, 2013). The offences he has committed to appoint the new director and disqualified to maintain the company (Coffee, Sale and Henderson 2015). He was also charged with another 5 offences under contravention of s 1350 of the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth), two contraventions of s 215 of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) and two contraventions of s 135.2 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth). For committing the offence Mr. Schwartz has been fined the capital of $13,578.94 (du Plessis and De Koker 2017). Reference Adams v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (2003) 46 ACSR 68 Coffee Jr, J.C., Sale, H. and Henderson, M.T., 2015. Securities regulation: Cases and materials. du Plessis, J.J. and De Koker, J.N. eds., 2017. Disqualification of Company Directors: A Comparative Analysis of the Law in the UK, Australia, South Africa, the Us and Germany. Taylor Francis. Hiller, J.S., 2013. The benefit corporation and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(2), pp.287-301. Schwartz: In the matter of Babybelle Pty Ltd (ACN 116 052 683) [2007] FCA 1469 (September 2007)