The Editor,

Until corporate owners and officers are held liable for all the harms they cause, we will remain disadvantaged by the law as it stands.

For example a number of executives and board members in Tasmania have been taken to court by work safety authorities and have used their corporation’s ‘personhood’ to avoid their responsibilities.

In one such recent case a worker had the tips of his fingers removed because a safety guard was removed from the machine he was operating.

The directors were able to establish that they were not the ‘employer’. Then shifted the blame to the corporation as the ‘legal person’ responsible.
They pleaded not guilty on their own behalf but had the corporation plead guilty and apologised on its behalf to the worker, and then made the nasty corporation write a cheque to pay the fine.

Finally they had said corporation sue the work safety authority for their court costs because they themselves had been found not guilty and therefore not responsible for safety in anyway in the workplace.

So we now have the situation that no living, breathing human can be made accountable for their actions or inaction in relation to Occupation Health and Safety or any other corporate behaviour for that matter, like getting the ‘Legal entity’ (the good old Corporation) to pay them salary and bonuses beyond reason.

John Ward
20 Grosse Road
Gordon Tasmania
7150
62921211

Interesting. I wonder if we as real flesh and blood beings can separate our flesh and blood bodies from our corporate legal fictions known as our person and thereby immunise ourselves from having to pay taxes or fines; as these are statutes enforced upon our legal fictions, our persons?

Until we get rid of the top dog corporation called The COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA:
http://www.search.asic.gov.au/cgi-bin/gns030c?acn=122104616&juris=9&hdtext=&srchsrc=1
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-idea?action=getcompany&CIK=805157

I guess us mere mortals (slaves) don't really have much of a chance :(

On another note, if the COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA is a corporation, which appears so, who's the share holders and how much are my dividends worth?

Food for thought?

Individuals have also be responsible for their own stupid behaviour.Workers comp is now inadaquate because of fradualant claims.How do you disprove a bad back?What is is the the point of making directors responsible?If the we all were more honest,there would be more jobs and wealth for all.Both workers and business are at fault.

We have a legal system that is not always a justice system.

The poor are less likely to get away with avoiding their responsibilities than the very rich.

Having worked in HR many years ago, we had a problem with one fraudulent compensation claim but the insurance company managed to get footage of the 'incapacitated' person digging in their front garden and swinging their kids around on their backs and shoulders.

If all persons who hold any financial interest in a corporation are to be legally responsible for the failures of the corporation , the result will that every person who holds even one share in a public corporation , including an interest through a managed fund will have to pay not just a share of the financial liability of the corporation which is equal to the person's proportionate share of the total assets of the corporation , but , potentially , the entire liability . Thus , Battler Bill , holder of $ 100 worth of shares in News Limited , may have to pay the entire judgement obtained by Battler Jim against News Limited , if the major shareholders are found to have no assets that can be realised [ because certain legal protective measures have been taken by the major shareholders ] . If this change to the law , which is suggested , were implemented , stock market investments would become past history , which may not be all bad .

hi dear i like this post but dera i can't guess who is responsible i will tell you but first i cuncern about this thanx

http://www.casualdate.net.au/brisbane-dating

Take it from someone who divorced an accountant, "corporate citizenship", the existence of a business as a legal entity, is at the very heart of all our present problems, it allows those at the reins to pretty much do whatever they want, and they have, and we're all paying the price now!
My ex' was as rich as Croesus, and the kids and I lived on the pension, all her "assets" were corporately owned, and untouchable, plus there's NO help for a man suing a woman for maintenance, lol, god forbid!

John,

surely the person who removed the safety guard holds primary responsibility. If he/she was told to remove the guard by a supervisor then responsibility also lies with that person.

Why would the director of the company be responsible? They don't have anything to do with the day to day running of plant and machinery.

In my mine safety is everyones responsibility. You either don't use equipment that has had safety guards removed, or you do a risk assessment (in which case responsibility is taken by those involved).

Obviously the worker is entitled to compensation from the company, but wanting to hold a director personally responsible seems excessive.

Operating on a pyramid system as a corp' does, the top dog earns the most and should have the biggest responsibility, why else would they demand that much!
A corporation is established only for tax purposes.