Conflict of Interest among Directors and Officers

Written by Brody Gray
JD Candidate 2024 | UCalgary Law

Intro:
The modern world of entrepreneurial spirit includes more and more individuals searching for their own “side hustle” in addition to their working commitments. The term side hustle can encapsulate anything from picking up a few extra shifts at a second job to starting your own company. Many entrepreneurs may even be tied up in multiple side hustles turned early-stage companies as they go about their business careers. The formation of these companies is a key component to a healthy and growing economy. Still, entrepreneurs taking on a director or officer role in multiple companies may find themselves in a conflict of interest, which can lead to significant legal issues.
 
Conflict of Interest
Under both the Business Corporations Act (Alberta) (“ABCA”) and the Canada Business Corporations Act (“CBCA”), directors and officers owe a fiduciary duty to each corporation that they serve on the board of or are employed by, respectively. Section 122(1)(a) of the ABCA[1] and section 122(1)(a) of the CBCA[2] both impose an obligation on directors and officers to act honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interests of the corporation. The duty to act honestly and in good faith is understood at common law to include a duty to act without conflict or without a conflicting personal interest, on behalf of the corporation.
            A director or officer who is also working for or with another competing company could be in violation of 122(1)(a) under the applicable statute. Directors are occasionally hired specifically for their industry expertise, so it will always be a fact-specific inquiry about the details of the situation. The case of Pardy v Dobbin is centred around a possible breach of the fiduciary duty when a director acts for multiple boards.[3] In this case, it was not enough to find that Dobbin had simply worked as a director for two separate companies or that the two companies had both been golf courses. The court held that there would need to be evidence that the corporations were competing for the same opportunities, in the same market, or in some other way directly in competition with each other for a breach of the fiduciary duty to be found.
            A further fact-specific inquiry would be raised if a director or officer had a personal relationship with a director or officer of another corporation to determine if a self-dealing contract or conflict of interest arises.[4] A breach of a fiduciary duty may arise even when an individual isn’t personally acting for multiple boards if they act or structure deals in a manner that is self-dealing through personal connections with multiple companies.
 
How Does this Apply?
            For the modern entrepreneur, any new position should be approached cautiously to ensure their new venture does not compete with any current business they are involved with. Any entrepreneur must be cautious to ensure they avoid breaching their fiduciary duty to both companies.
            The application of the fiduciary duty has consequences for the modern entrepreneur outside of their own obligations as well. Entrepreneurs may find themselves in contact with venture capitalists and other investment bodies in the early stages of their companies, and many of these groups will seek shares or board seats as part of investment deals. Entrepreneurs should be mindful that these parties, though they may act for the interests of a certain subset of shareholders, still hold a fiduciary duty to the corporation as a whole.
 
What if you are in a conflict of interest?
If a director or officer finds themselves in a conflict of interest, certain business deals or contracts made while in this conflict may be struck down or voidable. The applicable corporate statute provides a “safe harbour rule” in section 120 that allows disclosure by directors and officers in relation to contracts to cure a self-interested contract. Several legislative factors must be considered to determine if the safe harbour rule can save a specific contract.
First, the impacted director or officer must be a party to a material transaction with the corporation and disclose this relationship in writing into the meeting minutes.[5] The disclosure must reflect the full nature and extent of the impacted director or officer’s influence. The amount of disclosure is contextualized, but fundamentally, it must make the rest of the board “fully informed of the real state of things.”[6] Second, the disclosure must be made at the first instance the contract is considered, or at the first instance in which the director became an interested party.[7] Finally, when the contract is voted on the impacted director or officer must remove themselves from the vote.[8]
These requirements can be extremely difficult for smaller boards at start-up companies to meet, where directors are not entirely independent of each other, and removing one director from a particular vote may mean the removal of a significant percentage of those entitled to vote.
Conclusion:
            Directors and officers should always be wary of their greater fiduciary duty to the corporations they work for. They should be mindful of avoiding placing themselves in a conflict-of-interest situation. When individuals accept a high role in a corporation, they take on a significant responsibility to their fellow directors, officers, and the shareholders they work for. This is a responsibility they should remain mindful of by always maintaining their focus and efforts in the best interest of the corporation


[1] Alberta Business Corporations Act, RSA 2000, c B-9, 122(1)(a).

[2] Canada Business Corporations Act, RSC 1985, c C-44, 122(1)(a).

[3] Pardy v Dobbin, 2000 NFCA 11 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/1n1pq>, retrieved on 2024-04-05.

[4] Exide Canada Inc v Hilts, 2005 CanLII 40363 (ON SC), <https://canlii.ca/t/1lx69>, retrieved on 2024-04-05.

[5] ABCA/CBCA, supra note 1, s 120(1).

[6] Gray v New Augarita Porcupine Mines Ltd, 1952 CanLii 322 (UK JCPC), <https://canlii.ca/t/gwcjs>, retrieved on 2024-04-05.

[7] ABCA/CBCA, supra note 1, s 120(2).

[8] ABCA/CBCA, ibid s 120(8).