In relation to Granda Corp's expectation for Granda to be a corporate director, it's important to note that CA 1993 s 151 stipulates that only a natural person can be appointed as a director of a company. This differs from other places like the UK, where a corporation can serve as a director if there's at least one individual director. However, in Australia and New Zealand, the standard is that directors must be individuals. This rule is designed to ensure that those managing companies are personally accountable for their actions. This means that a corporate entity, such as Granda Corp, cannot serve as a director. . Even though corporate entity don't possess any human traits like knowledge or even make judgment efficient, this doesn't prevent a company f While it's true what s 151 mentions, the case of Gillies Bakery Ltd v Gillespie has established that a corporate entity can serve as a de facto director. The court had to consider whether a company (Gillies Bakery Ltd) that was not formally appointed as a director but had assumed the role of a director could be considered a de facto director. The court found that Gillies Bakery Ltd had been acting as a director of another company and was therefore a de facto director. This meant that Gillies Bakery Ltd was subject to the same duties and responsibilities as a formally appointed director under the Companies Act 1993. Therefore court held that there is no conflict in deeming a company a director. where do i put that part