| dc.description |
A company is in the eyes of law an artificial person, with no physical existence; neither soul nor body of its own as such it cannot act on its own, it can do so through some human agency called the directors1. These directors are entrusted with the interest of others; they are not allowed to make the business an object of interest to themselves because from the frailty of nature, one who has power will be too readily seized with the inclination to use the opportunity for serving his own interest at the expense of those for whom he is entrusted.2
This being the case the company needs to be in the proper hands of person who mans it, as the success of the company depends ultimately on the calibre of its directors and the effectiveness of the board. The law puts qualification for a person to be appointed as a director to make sure that the company is under control of a proper person who can be accountable for his own actions. Need for responsibility and accountability have impelled rules circumscribing the qualifications, conducts and responsibilities of company directors. The modern commercial world demands security and certainty when dealing with the corporate person.
The companies Act, 2002 provides for the qualification of a company director to include among others, share qualification if the articles of association of the company so require, age limit from 21 to 70 years, a person not discharged bankrupt or not convicted in any offense in relation to the management of the company, and signification of consent to the registrar of companies. This research looked at the qualification of the Company directors in the Companies Act, by making an analysis to see whether the said Act is adequate or not and if not whether the inadequacy has significance impacts on the performance of the companies. |
|