For IndividualsFor Educators
ExpertMinds LogoExpertMinds
ExpertMinds

Ace your certifications with Practice Exams and AI assistance.

  • Browse Exams
  • For Educators
  • Blog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Cookie Policy
  • Support
  • AWS SAA Exam Prep
  • PMI PMP Exam Prep
  • CPA Exam Prep
  • GCP PCA Exam Prep

© 2026 TinyHive Labs. Company number 16262776.

    PracticeACCAACCA LW — Corporate and Business Law Practice Exam 3Question 56
    Hard2 marksMultiple Choice
    Syllabus H: Corporate fraudulent and criminal behaviourSection BCorporate and Business Law

    ACCA · Question 56 · Syllabus H: Corporate fraudulent and criminal behaviour

    Scenario: Titanium Forge plc has three directors: Alan, Brenda, and Charles. Alan recently discovered a lucrative opportunity to supply steel to a new bridge project. Without telling the board, Alan set up his own company to take the contract. Brenda, the finance director, failed to notice that Titanium Forge was trading while insolvent for six months. Charles rarely attends board meetings.

    If Titanium Forge plc goes into insolvent liquidation, what is Brenda's potential liability regarding her failure to notice the insolvency?

    Answer options:

    A.

    She may be liable for fraudulent trading under s.213 Insolvency Act 1986.

    B.

    She may be liable for wrongful trading under s.214 Insolvency Act 1986, as she ought to have concluded there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding insolvent liquidation.

    C.

    She has no liability as she did not actively steal from the company.

    D.

    She is only liable if she personally guaranteed the company's debts.

    How to approach this question

    Apply the objective/subjective test for wrongful trading to a finance director.

    Full Answer

    B.She may be liable for wrongful trading under s.214 Insolvency Act 1986, as she ought to have concluded there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding insolvent liquidation.✓ Correct
    Under s.214 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (wrongful trading), a director is liable if they knew or *ought to have concluded* that there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding insolvent liquidation. The standard is that of a reasonably diligent person with the general knowledge, skill, and experience expected of someone in that role (objective), plus any special skills they actually have (subjective). As Finance Director, Brenda objectively ought to have known the financial state.

    Common mistakes

    Assuming that because she didn't *actually* know, she cannot be liable.
    Question 55All questionsQuestion 57

    Practice the full ACCA LW — Corporate and Business Law Practice Exam 3

    60 questions · hints · full answers · grading

    Sign up freeTake the exam

    More questions from this exam

    Q01In the English legal system, which of the following accurately describes the difference between t...EasyQ02Which of the following courts is bound by the decisions of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division)?MediumQ03When interpreting statutes, which rule allows a judge to consider the original common law defect ...MediumQ04A tech startup, CloudNova, advertises a new cloud storage package on its website for £10 per year...MediumQ05In contract law, past consideration is generally not valid. However, there are exceptions. Which ...Hard
    View all 60 questions →