In brief – Board min­utes can serve as cru­cial evidence

Hav­ing accu­rate min­utes is not just a for­mal­i­ty required under the cor­po­ra­tions law. Detailed min­utes may serve as the cru­cial evi­dence required to defend a direc­tor from charges of breach­ing of his or her duties, includ­ing charges of trad­ing while insolvent.


Def­i­n­i­tion and pur­pose of board minutes

A signed and record­ed minute is evi­dence of a pro­ceed­ing, res­o­lu­tion or dec­la­ra­tion to which the minute relates. Accu­rate board min­utes are an impor­tant resource for man­ag­ing the com­pa­ny and sup­port sound risk man­age­ment by pro­vid­ing a writ­ten record of board delib­er­a­tions and decisions. 

Board min­utes pro­vide evi­dence that a board has exer­cised care in deci­sion mak­ing. They also sub­stan­ti­ate that a board is oper­at­ing in accor­dance with legal require­ments, includ­ing the com­pa­ny’s con­sti­tu­tion and the reg­u­la­to­ry requirements.

Board min­utes assist in the man­age­ment of the company

Beyond being a legal pro­tec­tion, board min­utes also serve an impor­tant man­age­ment func­tion. Accu­rate min­utes are required in order to:

  • Con­firm any deci­sions made
  • Record any agreed actions to be taken
  • Record who has been allo­cat­ed any tasks or responsibilities
  • Prompt action from any rel­e­vant attendees
  • Pro­vide details of the meet­ing to any­one unable to attend
  • Serve as a record of the meet­ing’s pro­ce­dure and outcome
Com­pli­ance not universal

Despite the impor­tance of board min­utes, many com­pa­nies con­tin­ue to make inad­e­quate records of board meet­ings. This is regret­table because by neglect­ing this sim­ple task, direc­tors are depriv­ing them­selves of an impor­tant legal safeguard. 

In the event of legal action being tak­en against the com­pa­ny, min­utes of meet­ings can be used to prove that the direc­tors have tak­en all rea­son­able steps to act respon­si­bly, com­ply with legal require­ments and mit­i­gate risk. 

For fur­ther infor­ma­tion, please contact:

If you would like to repub­lish this arti­cle, it is gen­er­al­ly approved, but pri­or to doing so please con­tact the Mar­ket­ing team at marketing@​swaab.​com.​au. This arti­cle is not legal advice and the views and com­ments are of a gen­er­al nature only. This arti­cle is not to be relied upon in sub­sti­tu­tion for detailed legal advice.

Publications

Cross-Com­pa­ny Secu­ri­ty and Liq­uida­tor Chal­lenges: Full Fed­er­al Court Restores Cer­tain­ty in CEG Direct Secu­ri­ties v Coop­er [2025] FCAFC 47

A sig­nif­i­cant deci­sion from the Full Fed­er­al Court has clar­i­fied the lim­its of liq­uida­tors’ pow­ers to unwind cross-com­pa­ny secu­ri­ty grant­ed…

Copy­right and Gen­er­a­tive AI: what Aus­tralia can learn from the Meta and Anthrop­ic Rulings

In 2025, two U.S. court deci­sions, Kadrey v. Meta and Bartz v. Anthrop­ic, have pro­vid­ed the first real judi­cial answers…

Fed­er­al Court Deci­sion Lim­its Effec­tive Use of Set-Off in Con­trac­tu­al Annu­al Salary Arrangements

The Deci­sionIn a recent Fed­er­al Court deci­sion*, Jus­tice Per­ram held that while con­trac­tu­al set-off claus­es in an annu­al salary arrange­ment can…

In the News

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, The reac­tion to Char­lie Kirk’s assas­si­na­tion and its impli­ca­tions for employ­ment law”, pub­lished in Lawyers Week­ly on 26 Sep­tem­ber 2025

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, ​“The reac­tion to Char­lie Kirk’s assas­si­na­tion and its impli­ca­tions for employ­ment law”, pub­lished…

Sarah Heuv­el pro­vides insight into get­ting Rent Roll Trans­ac­tions Com­pli­ance Compliant

Sarah Heuv­el in an inter­view with Matthew Cial­lel­la of MC Broking & Advi­so­ry, dis­cuss rent roll trans­ac­tions and the three key…

Michael Byrnes appeared on Mon­ey News with Evan Lucas on 2GB on 8 Sep­tem­ber 2025 to dis­cuss the recent Fed­er­al Court deci­sion relat­ing to salary arrange­ments, set-off claus­es and award compliance

Michael Byrnes appeared on Mon­ey News with Evan Lucas on 2GB on 8 Sep­tem­ber 2025 to dis­cuss the recent Fed­er­al Court…

Sign up for our Newsletter

*Mandatory information