本篇论文代写-公司法讲了儿童看护公司可以使用第127条法律，该法律规定，只有当公司的两名董事，董事和公司秘书，公司才能执行。他们可以提出这样的论点:基于她的工作角色和职责的原则，苏珊没有合法的权利为公司的利益行事。用于儿童护理。本篇论文代写文章由澳洲第一论文 Assignment First辅导网整理，供大家参考阅读。
Company’s Relations with Outsiders & Promoters
Child Care Company can use the section 127 law which states that the company can execute only if the two directors of the company, director and the company secretary. They can make the argument that Susan did not have the legal right to act in the interest of the company based on the tenets of her job role and responsibility. For Child Care Pty. Ltd, the case of Richard Brady Franks Ltd v Price (1937) 58 CLR 112 can be used to make an assumption of the statutory limitation of the company. The common-law states that company cannot avoid the contract that has entered on the behalf of the agent. This agent cannot breach the fiduciary duty when the third party was acting in a good faith efforts.
Playgrounds R ‘Us Pty Ltd Company can use the organic theory and this is found to explain that the company has two entities. Section 128(1) of the Corporate Act (2001) is found to provide that a person is entitled to make certain assumptions. In the case of section 129 explains about the ‘dealings with a company’. It is the board of directors and members in the general body meeting. The board of meeting and members are found to have the directing mind of the company. They have stronger influences on the management policy. Based on this, the agent or the employee of the company is found to execute the contract on the behalf of the company. The S126 states that there can be legal power that can be bestowed to a person when they act on behalf of the company. The company is bound to act on behalf of the agent. Based on this, it can be argued that the company can reasonably assume that Susan had the legal right to make assumptions (Adams and Zutshi, 2004). Playgrounds R ‘Us Pty Ltd can make the assumptions based on this tenet.