Re Mumtaz Properties Ltd; Wetton (as liquidator of Mumtaz Properties Ltd) v Ahmed and others [2011] EWCA Civ 610, [2011] All ER (D) 237 (May)
In considering whether a person had been responsible for acts sufficient to constitute him or her a de facto director for the purposes of s 212 of the Insolvency Act 1986, all the relevant factors had to be taken into account. Those factors would include any holding out as a director by the company, or any claim by the person to be a director. The liability was imposed on those who were in a position to prevent damage to creditors by taking proper steps to protect their interests. Those who assumed to act as directors and who thereby exercised the powers and discharged the functions of a director, whether validly appointed or not, had to accept the responsibilities of the office. Therefore, consideration had to be given to what the person actually did to see whether he assumed those responsibilities in relation to the subject company. There was no single test in identifying what functions were, in essence, the sole responsibility of a de
