代写论文-IMR公司的结构。IMR的结构使公司无法从IMR中受益，它的存在只是为了让外部人士受益。IMR的存在是为了保护那些无法或不需要了解公司内部工作的人，因此需要推测一些事情。公司不能是这样一个实体，公司必须知道它的运作，因此不能要求任何东西。IMR不能使内部人员受益，这一点在Morris v Kanssen案中也得到了证实，在该案件中，法院认为内部人员，如董事，不能声称他们不知道内部工作，或者内部工作有问题。作为公司内部人士，董事对IMR没有任何目的。IMR的设计是为了保护那些无法了解公司内部运作的外部人士。因此，董事被禁止依赖规则，因为他们被期望了解内部一致性，也被期望维护它们。他们有责任以正确的方式进行内部交易。董事不能利用IMR来为自己谋利益，并声称事情做得不妥当。董事有责任确保外界对其工作的假设得到满足，公司对与其合作的人也有责任。论文范文代写论文-IMR公司的结构分享给留学生阅读。
This IMR is structured such that the company will not be able to benefit from the IMR, it only exists to benefit the outsider. The IMR exists to protect those people who are unable or would not have the necessity to know the internal working of the company and would hence need to presume things. The company cannot be such an entity, the company has to know its working and hence cannot claim anything. IMR cannot benefit an insider, and this was established in the Morris v Kanssen case as well, where the court held that an insider such as a director cannot claim that they did not know internal workings, or that an internal working was faulted. A director has no purpose for the IMR as an insider of the company would do. The IMR was designed to protect outsiders who had no means of knowing the company’s internal workings. Therefore, a director is prevented from relying on the rule, because they are expected to know about the internal consistencies and expected to also work on maintain them. It would be their duty to conduct the internal transactions in a right way. Director could not use the IMR to their own advantage and claim that things were not done properly. It is the directors duty to ensure that the outside presumptions on working are met, and it is the company’s duties towards the people that it works with.
Outsider is hence relieved from the actual checking. The outsider need no consider the internal actions and could assume company and its internal steps are being executed properly. This assumption based on faith or trust is what most rules and regulations in partnerships and collaborated working is based on. It is hence a very basic assumption. This assumption is also necessary as not all outsiders would need to have working knowledge of the company internally. All outsiders need not have to understand the company’s management; some working methods of the company are kept from the public for good reason. So when the reasonable expectations of the outsider on the working of the company are breached, then according to the IMR, a claim can be staked by the outsider. However, what constitutes reasonable internal management will become an issue. According to the Act, the outsiders can assume that there are no procedural defects in director appointments. Secondly, director board meetings are assumed to be called and held properly. Thirdly, all board meeting approvals are assumed to be required under company rules. In addition, based on the situation, there could be further assumptions on internal working and consistency that the outsider could presume.