ipl-logo

Andrew Sigalla Case Summary

494 Words2 Pages

Andrew Sigalla, a former director of a technology company, TZ LTD based in Sydney was found guilty by the Supreme Court (NSW) under 24 counts of dishonest conduct. Mr Sigalla did not fulfill his director duties breaching both the fiduciary (General Law) and statutory (Corporate Act 2001) duties. Under general law directors have fiduciary duties, which require directors to act in the company interests at all times. Even if the corporate opportunity may arise, directors such as Sigalla, are expected to not seek further benefits personally unless relevant information is disclosed to the board. While operating as a director Mr Sigalla privately invested into public companies (between late 2006-2009) of financial significance to the market economy. During this investment period, Sigalla demonstrated conflict of interest and considerable amount of deception through his action …show more content…

Mr Sigalla misused his position as a director by transferring the undisclosed company funds up to $8.6 million for his private investments. Yoo (2017) states that $500,000 worth of shares were transferred to a Hong Kong based company. Large amount of TZ LTD company funds were also used to pay off Sigalla’s personal mortgage and gambling debts. The company transaction was disguised and fake mandate to justify the movement and usage of payments. As a result, potential investors fear that directors such as Mr Sigalla will misuse their positions. Depriving capital amongst the investors within the market. While in this position Sigalla had full access to the financial reports which the information benefited both his private/public entities. Thus, Mr Sigalla has breached his statutory duties under

More about Andrew Sigalla Case Summary

    Open Document