Do-Care Ltd., a small ASX-listed company, owned and operated a large number of nursing homes. Ackland was the company's chief executive officer and managing director. Prior to this, he had many years' experience as chief administrator of a large public hospital in Melbourne. Hadley, a director and the company's chief financial officer, has postgraduate degrees in business and accounting as well as a PhD in finance. Do-Care Ltd's other directors, Barnes, Campbell and Davis, are non-executive directors and merely attend the monthly board and audit committee meetings. Barnes and Campbell are both doctors and have been appointed to the board to provide expert medical advice. Davis is a partner in a large firm of chartered accountants and is the chair of the board's audit committee. Barnes and Campbell are the other members of the audit committee. At a recent board meeting attended by all the directors, a long-term multi-million dollar contract with Hartwell Pty Ltd to supply necessary nursing home equipment to Do-Care Ltd was discussed. At the time Campbell and Davis were unaware that Hartwell Pty Ltd's prices were extremely high. While Campbell was also unaware that Ackland's family company owned 35 percent of Hartwell Pty Ltd's shares, Barnes suspected (but was not certain) that Ackland had a financial interest in Hartwell Pty Ltd but did not mention his suspicions to the other directors. At this meeting, Hoadley reported to the board on the level of the company's current liabilities. He informed the board that Do-Care had significant short-term loans that needed to be either repaid within the year or refinanced. A decision about the long-term multi-million dollar contract was deferred to the next board meeting and Hadley was asked to prepare a report on the financial impact of the contract for the company. A number of matters were considered at this subsequent board meeting. First, Hoadley's inadequate but favorable report on the financial impact of the contract was accepted without discussion, and the board resolved that Do-Care should enter into the contract. Secondly, the board considered the company's draft annual financial statements prepared by the company's accounting staff under Hoadley's supervision. After the board's audit committee recommended the adoption of the draft financial statements, the directors, without further discussion, formally resolved pursuant to s295(4)(c) that the financial statements complied with applicable accounting standards and presented a true and fair view of the company's financial position. None of the directors noticed that the financial statements incorrectly classified $500 million in debt as non-current liabilities. The financial statements with the incorrectly classified non-current liabilities were then submitted to the AS in accordance with Do-Care's s 674(2) continuous disclosure obligations. Consider the position of each of the Do-Care directors and explain whether they breached any directors' duties in the above circumstances.

i want this answer in an australian context with nondetectable from Turnitin and free from plagiarism