Plain language law

New Zealand law explained for everyone

Deposit Takers Act 2023

Enforcement - Miscellaneous - Attribution of liability

183: State of mind of directors, employees, or agents attributed to body corporate or other principal

You could also call this:

"What a company was thinking when it did something wrong can be figured out by looking at what its staff were thinking"

Illustration for Deposit Takers Act 2023

When you are dealing with a company that has done something wrong under the Deposit Takers Act 2023, you need to figure out what the company was thinking. You can do this by looking at what one of its directors, employees, or agents was thinking, as long as they were acting within their job. If the person or company is not a company, but has still done something wrong under the Act, you can look at what their employee or agent was thinking, as long as they were acting within their job. You are trying to understand what the person or company knew, intended, believed, or wanted to do, and why they wanted to do it, which is called their state of mind.

This text is automatically generated. It might be out of date or be missing some parts. Find out more about how we do this.

This page was last updated on

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=LMS497555.

Topics:
Money and consumer rights > Banking and loansBusiness > Industry rules
Previous

182: Appeal to High Court, or

"Challenging a District Court decision about deposit takers in the High Court"

Next

184: Conduct of directors, employees, or agents attributed to body corporate or other principal, or

"What company staff do can be seen as the company's actions too"

Part 5Enforcement
Miscellaneous: Attribution of liability

183State of mind of directors, employees, or agents attributed to body corporate or other principal

  1. If, in a proceeding under this Act in respect of any relevant conduct engaged in by a body corporate, it is necessary to establish the state of mind of the body corporate, it is sufficient to show that a director, an employee, or an agent of the body corporate, acting within the scope of their actual or apparent authority, had that state of mind.

  2. If, in a proceeding (other than a proceeding for an offence) under this Act in respect of any relevant conduct engaged in by a person other than a body corporate, it is necessary to establish the state of mind of the person, it is sufficient to show that an employee or agent of the person, acting within the scope of their actual or apparent authority, had that state of mind.

  3. In this section,—

    relevant conduct means conduct in relation to which any provision of this Act applies

      state of mind, in relation to a person, includes the knowledge, intention, opinion, belief, or purpose of the person and the person's reasons for that intention, opinion, belief, or purpose.

      Compare