George Wilson4 said:To build on that, Charles Ramos7 makes a valid point. A director has to actually be an employee. A company can only operate without staff if the director is simultaneously working for another firm while holding that leadership role there too. They can't just be unemployed. The only exception might be those first few months when a company is essentially just sitting idle.
When the ZTD first took effect back in 1995, it didn't mandate that a board member (the director) had to be an employee. An amendment was introduced in 1999 regarding this (Article 32 stated a company could operate as long as at least one board member was an employee), but the Supreme Court eventually struck down that change as unconstitutional (Federal Register 52/00)...
However, specific laws governing certain industries do prescribe who must be employed within such a firm to allow operations to continue...
I found this online:
"Examples of such laws include:
- The Investment Company Act (Federal Register, No. 107/95), Article 18...
- The Privatization Act (Federal Register, No. 109/97), Article 17, Paragraph 3...
- The Banking Act (Federal Register, No. 161/98), Article 19, Paragraph 2...
- The Transportation Act (Federal Register, No. 36/98), Article 17...
Similar provisions are found in other laws or sub-regulations enacted under these statutes, such as:
- The Maritime Code (Federal Register, No. 17/94 and 74/94) - Maritime Shipping Regulation (Federal Register, No. 17/95)...
- The Hydrographic Activity Act (Federal Register, No. 68/98) - Regulations on the requirements for legal entities performing hydrographic activities (Federal Register, No. 162/98)...
- The Environmental Protection Act (Federal Register, No. 82/94) - Regulation on conditions for granting consent to perform professional environmental protection services (Federal Register, No. 7/97)...