Computer mis-use act - Directorship?

[Lucan Unlordly]

Would a charge and ultimate prosecution under the Computer mis-use act prevent a Director from maintaining their position and/or taking up another directorship elsewhere?

 

[Lisa Thomas]

I do no know what the computer mis-use act is but to my knowledge the only thing preventing an individual from being a Director of a UK Limited Company is bankruptcy or disqualification.

 

[Paul Norman]

I suspect not - although it is the kind of thing you ought to disclose, which might put some people off having you as a director. Or not, of course.

 

[Newchodge]

Would a charge and ultimate prosecution under the Computer mis-use act prevent a Director from maintaining their position and/or taking up another directorship elsewhere?

Was there a conviction?

 

[AllUpHere]

Was there a conviction?

That has to be the first question. Anyone could be charged and prosecuted; whether or not you are found guilty is the point.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Was there a conviction?

Sorry, I meant conviction.......

 

[WaveJumper]

As above were they found guilty, and generally under the computer miss use act people are also involved in amongst other things fraudulent activities which one would assume if charged and found guilty disqualifies them from being a director?

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

A little more detail

The accused is alleged to have taken possession of a Laptop and unlawfully accessed the email account of the former user which included confidential correspondence and sensitive information in relation to an anonymous safeguarding complaint. Passing of that information to the subject of the complaint led to a violent assault and the accused was subsequently arrested under the Computer Mis-use act.

I understand there are other areas of major concern that will likely form part of any prosecution.

 

[IanSuth]

The only case even vaguely similar i know of the sentence also involved restrictions on computer/internet use for a set period of time. Those restrictions might make it hard to carry out some duties.

I dont see how that offence in and of itself would preclude becoming a Director BUT it depends what the company does as in some industries clients or industry bodies will themselves run a basic check on Directors/Company owners as part of licencing/accreditation requirements - specifically anything to do with vulnerable people (inc children), dangerous substances, drugs or alcohol, finance or gambling they will tend to dig deeper and even some convictions are not "spent" as they are usually

Personally i would get the person involved to talk to their solicitor or probation officer as they would have better more up to date and tailored to the exact situation advice

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Personally i would get the person involved to talk to their solicitor or probation officer as they would have better more up to date and tailored to the exact situation advice

I'm removed from this situation and have no contact with the person involved.
It is however, part of a wider web of poor procedures, malpractice and denial that could open the door for forensic investigation of other practices within the organisation involved.

 

[WaveJumper]

Sounds like it's going to open a very large can of worms for someone

 

[IanSuth]

I'm removed from this situation and have no contact with the person involved.
It is however, part of a wider web of poor procedures, malpractice and denial that could open the door for forensic investigation of other practices within the organisation involved.

I think it is a situation i would be trying to keep at as long an arms reach as possible. Not least as if you are on the complainant side the kind of person who leads to getting people assaulted well knows people who will carry out assaults

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

I think it is a situation i would be trying to keep at as long an arms reach as possible. Not least as if you are on the complainant side the kind of person who leads to getting people assaulted well knows people who will carry out assaults

The context in which this situation may play out could see it fizzle and disappear or bring about the long awaited removal of folk who've turned a blind eye to many an injustice.
The pen is mightier than the sword and those in the firing line should be more worried about that, than anyone involved should about being assaulted.

PS: I'm afraid I was the quiet kid at school who woke up when somebody tried to push in at the front of the dinner queue.

 

[Ozzy]

As far as the Companies Act is concerned it is as @Lisa Thomas has already mentioned, disqualification and bankruptcy, so they can "legally" still be a director. However many companies will have employment contracts and/or director service agreements which will bring it under their employment terms whether the person can hold office in a company or basically be employed with a criminal record. It would usually fall under a clause around bringing the company into disrepute.

 

[The Resolver]

Directors can be disqualfied to act as directors under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986/ This usually happens following the insolvency of a company.

 

[Chris Ashdown]

Why don't the other directors vote him off the board?

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Why don't the other directors vote him off the board?

The Limited Company was set up to allow some level of protection should the self appointed board members do something that made them personally (financially) responsible. The type of allegation, although significantly more severe than planned for, made against the individual facing charges, is I am told, the very reason the company was set up in the first place, so voting off is unlikely.

Innocent until proven guilty may come into play, but there's a shortage of blinkers in town

 

[paulears]

The Computer Misuse Act isn’t really reflective of today’s computer society, as it’s really to do with data, and we have other legal methods that are a bit more up to date for practical things. If somebody now gets a prosecution under this act, it’s really fraud, done by computer. Accessing and changing data, but also hacking, introducing or removing protection from viruses, or maybe things like personnel records and potential blackmail. It’s still used I believe because it fits certain activity, but a conviction would seem a pretty solid barrier, but unless he gets disqualified, he’s still allowed to be a director.

 

[WaveJumper]

Yes this is what I was getting at above if a person is getting charged or convicted under the Computer Misuse Act it will be more likely Hacking related which is normally tied to some sort of serious fraud which if convicted surly leads too disqualification as director.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Accessing and changing data, but also hacking, introducing or removing protection from viruses, or maybe things like personnel records and potential blackmail.

It's more simple than hacking as the accused had the means to access another parties emails having taken possession of the company laptop. Accessing and disclosing sensitive information, creating portfolios with the prospect of later use to manipulate or blackmail others does, I am told, all stem from it being unlawful to access the personal accounts of others in the first place.

 

[jimbof]

Would a charge and ultimate prosecution under the Computer mis-use act prevent a Director from maintaining their position and/or taking up another directorship elsewhere?

I don't think it would, though I can imagine knock-on problems, like difficulties in securing sensible insurance premiums for certain classes of insurance which might make you rather not have them as a director...

For example, this was the question asked during application for my business insurance:
"Have you or any of your directors or partners:
Been convicted of, or charged with, a criminal offence other than a conviction spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974"