Business concerning Directorship. |
|
I think would depend on how much the wife was involved in the business, and whether she had money tied up in it. My friend and her husband have a small limited company where he's the Director and she's the Company Secretary and handles the accounts. There are two shares, one each, which gives each of them 50% of the company. Although the wife is not a director, there's no way she's going to give up the share.
If she didn't have anything to do with the accounts, then it is possible that her husband could assign her share to someone else when the accounts are submitted to the Taxman, and Companies house, but she could easily challenged it in court as fraud - assuming she could afford to. Often cases don't come to court because they are too expensive, and her husband could do a deal where he keeps both halves of the company and she keeps a roof over her and the children's heads....
Conversly you can have companies where husband and wife hold 49% each, and there is a sleeping partner (someone who has invested in the company but has no direct dealings in how it is run) with 2%. It would be entirely possible for the husband and sleeping partner to gang up on the wife and have her removed as a director.
You could have a plot thread where the sleeping partner is the wife's best friend, sister-in-law, company accountant, whatever, who then starts an affair with the husband.
But they would still have to pay the wife 49% of the value of the company. Most companies make a loss (at least, on paper) so this may not be very much, if anything.
- NaomiM
<Added>If the sleeping partner was the company accountant (I know of a local company where this is the case), then she could easily hid the true value of the company from the wife and cheat her out of a proper share.
<Added>They could persuade the wife that the company is on the verge of bancruptcy and she and the husband would lose everything - being the majority shareholders and liable for the company's debts (although as a "Limited" company that's not strictly true) - so it would be in the family's best interests to swap her 49% for the sleeping partner's 2%.