In this respect, a director without a particular skill may delegate this duty to an official. Given the demands of modern business management this is particularly relevant. It also save time, by allowing certain mundane or time consuming tasks to be completed, whilst the director is free to deal with more pressing engagements. Except when specific powers are delegated to directors under the articles, there are no limitations to which directors may discharge their duties, provided of course that it does not breach their duty of care. It is clear that this extends to trusted employees performing administrative functions and persons performing specialist tasks, e.g. a company solicitor.
Case law suggests that the degree of reliance is greater.
While this rule is obviously used very much in practice today in relation to routine matters, perhaps the director would need a higher standard of alertness, particularly in relation to policy decisions, both with regard to security of information and quality of the work. There seems to be no need in this respect from the existing case law. Furthermore non-executives could be held by the same duties as executive directors. Neglect to monitor the only full time director allowed him the opportunity to misappropriate company funds. Under certain circumstances the failure to find a director liable for breach of duty could cost shareholders and creditors dear.