## Doctrine of Indoor Management (Turquand Rule)
Origin: Established in Royal British Bank v. Turquand (1856).
### Core Principle
- Persons dealing with the company cannot be assumed to have knowledge of the internal proceedings/affairs of the company.
- Outsiders need not enquire whether necessary meetings were convened/held properly or whether necessary resolutions were passed properly.
- They are entitled to assume that all internal procedures have been complied with.
- This protects external parties from internal irregularities of the company.
### DIM vs Doctrine of Constructive Notice (DCN)
| Aspect | Doctrine of Constructive Notice | Doctrine of Indoor Management |
|---|---|---|
| Protects | The company against outsiders | Outsiders against the company |
| Presumption | Outsiders presumed to know contents of public docs (MoA/AoA) | Outsiders need not check internal compliance |
| Role | Burden on outsider to know publicly filed docs | Safeguard against abuse of DCN by the company |
### Basis / Rationale for DIM
- Internal proceedings of a company are not matters of public knowledge.
- Without DIM, companies could escape liability to creditors by claiming officials lacked authority — DIM prevents this abuse.
### Leading Case: Royal British Bank v. Turquand (1856)
- Facts: Directors of a company borrowed money without passing the resolution at GM as required by AoA.
- Held: The company was bound by the borrowing. The bank was entitled to assume the resolution had been duly passed. DIM was recognised as an exception to DCN.
### Exceptions to DIM (i.e., when DCN applies and DIM does NOT protect the outsider)
#### (a) Knowledge of Irregularity
If the outsider has actual knowledge of the irregularity, DIM is not available. They may even be treated as part of the irregularity.
#### (b) Negligence / Suspicious Circumstances
If irregularities could be discovered with minimum effort, or circumstances are suspicious enough to invite enquiry, and the outsider fails to enquire, DIM does not apply.
#### (c) Forgery
DIM does not apply where a document is forged. Nothing can validate forgery; a company is never bound by forged documents of its officers.
#### (d) Non-existence of Agency
If the very existence of the agency relationship is in question (e.g., a person claims to be a director but was never appointed), the outsider cannot rely on DIM.
#### (e) Act Ultra Vires the Company
If the act is ultra vires the company itself (outside MoA objects), the outsider cannot enforce it by relying on DIM.