Safe Passage: SAFEs vs. Convertible Notes
Here are the key similarities, differences, and considerations to keep in mind about these two popular forms of investments.

“With great power comes great responsibility” might be the perfect metaphor for the considerations involved in serving as a corporate director.
Being a director can carry great social prestige and can offer privileges, but also involves significant responsibility and the risk of personal liability. In addition to seeking independent legal advice, here are some considerations to keep in mind:
The concept of a “board” originated centuries ago as the word for the table around which a household would gather. Today, a board of directors is the body that governs and oversees the management and affairs of a corporation. Directors play a crucial role in corporate governance and are responsible for extremely important aspects of corporate oversight, many of which cannot be delegated to anyone else, including voting on mergers and acquisitions, approving financial statements and bylaws, issuing securities, and declaring dividends.
Boards typically meet periodically, and can either approve matters by a majority vote at a meeting, or alternatively by way of a written resolution signed by all of the directors of the corporation. Directors are also responsible for monitoring and approving the actions of management, and often provide advice to executives.
Directors are elected by the shareholders. It is common for management to put forward nominees for election to the board and for directors to recommend that the shareholders vote for these nominees. There may also be a nominating committee on the board of directors, the role of which is to seek out qualified candidates and recommend nominations to management.
While shareholders may also nominate directors, many corporations have adopted advance notice by-laws or policies that prevent shareholders from making nominations from the floor of a shareholder meeting without prior notice.
Directors of Canadian companies must, in exercising their powers and discharging their duties, act honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interest of the corporation.
The federal corporate statute, the Canada Business Corporations Act (the “CBCA”) has codified this stakeholder corporate governance model (originally put forward in the influential Supreme Court decision BCE Inc. v. 1976 Debentureholders) where no other corporate statute has. Recently, a provision was added to the CBCA which provides that while acting with a view to the best interests of the corporation, directors may consider, but are not limited to, a list of factors which includes the interests of shareholders, employees, creditors, the environment, and the long-term interests of the corporation. It is not clear if this addition makes any substantive difference to directors’ duties or if it will alter their behaviour at all, nor is it clear if any of the provinces will follow suit and amend their corporate statutes in a similar way .
Directors must exercise the care, diligence and skill that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances. The standard of care requires each director to:
Directors must ensure they have the information needed in order to make informed decisions, assess the information critically and seek input from and test the recommendations of management and the company’s advisors.
Being a director involves the risk of personal liability. Below are some examples where directors may be held personally liable.
A stakeholder’s claim that a director has breached his or her statutory obligations or fiduciary duties is not necessarily the end of the story: certain defences may be available.
Corporate statutes provide that a director is not liable for consenting to certain breaches of corporate law requirements, such as issuing shares for consideration that is less than fair market value, or paying a dividend where the corporation cannot meet solvency requirements, if the director exercised the care, diligence and skill that a reasonably prudent person would have exercised in comparable circumstances.
This common law rule provides that the court should not substitute its own decisions for those of directors, and can offer broad protection from claims of breach of fiduciary duty, so long as the director acted in good faith and within a range of reasonable alternatives. As the Supreme Court of Canada put it in BCE: “Deference should be accorded to business decisions of directors taken in good faith and in the performance of the functions they were elected to perform by the shareholders.”
Unanimous shareholder agreements can be useful tools for shareholders. These agreements can transfer both the power and the corresponding liability of directors over to shareholders instead, and should definitely be among the documents you review when you are considering a board invitation. Look in particular for any kinds of transactions that must be approved by the shareholders, and other obligations of the board and corporation that must be satisfied (annual audits, provision of budgets and other information to certain shareholders, etc.).
Also consider whether the shareholders’ agreement governs how individuals are nominated for election by shareholders, and make sure you understand the arrangements and requirements for your own nomination.
If your corporation is a wholly-owned subsidiary or only has one shareholder, a declaration by the sole shareholder restricting in whole or in part the powers of the directors is deemed to be a unanimous shareholder agreement under the CBCA and OBCA. Declarations can be effective tools to help a shareholder keep control of a wholly-owned company.
Security and finance documents, especially loan agreements, are a common source of additional obligations for a company. A review of the company’s obligations and commitments under such documentation will help you understand some of the ongoing responsibilities and relationships the board must maintain, as well as the constraints within which it must operate.
For certain regulated businesses, a new director must obtain certain clearances or government approvals before joining a board – a process that may need to be initiated well before your intended election date.
Normally, individuals must provide consent in order to act as a corporate director. At issue in a recent decision, Bunton v. FTA Logistics Inc. and Ikenouye, was whether the applicant, Bunton, had been appointed as a director without her consent. This case arose because the Canada Revenue Agency was demanding payment of unremitted source deductions from Bunton on behalf of a corporation to which she had been a bookkeeper. The court held that in light of her lack of written consent, Bunton was never a director of the company.
However, if all directors have resigned or been removed by shareholders without replacement, corporate statutes such as the OBCA and the CBCA provide that any person who manages or supervises the management of the business and affairs of the corporation shall be deemed to be a director. Thus, it is possible for a person who has not given written consent to serve on the board to nonetheless face personal liability for managing the business and affairs of a company.
Certain stakeholders such as institutional and private equity investors may sometimes be granted a right to nominate a representative director on the board of a corporation in which these firms have investments. These nominee directors owe the same fiduciary duty to the investee corporation as all other directors, must act in the corporation’s best interests, and will be held to the same standard of care.
Nominee directors may face actual or perceived conflicts of interests where the nominating investor’s interests do not align with those of the corporation. Where a director has a real or perceived conflict of interest that could reasonably be expected to interfere with the exercise of their independent judgment as a fiduciary of the corporation, the board may wish to take steps to limit the director’s participation in discussion and voting on that matter.
Sometimes, such major stakeholders choose to appoint a board observer in addition to, or instead of, a nominee director so as to keep proximity to the board without their nominees needing to take on director duties or liabilities.
Directors, including nominee directors, generally have broad access to their company’s records, subject to limited exceptions.
A director’s fiduciary duty includes the obligation to keep their company’s information confidential, even from their nominating investor. In practice, however, a certain amount of transparency may be desirable (for example, to help the board draw on the investor’s expertise).
In any case, confidential information should only be disclosed with the company’s express agreement. An information-sharing agreement may address topics such as the nominating investor’s obligation to keep the information confidential; the purpose for which such information can be used and the specific representatives of the investor with whom it may be shared; whether the nominee director is responsible for a breach of the agreement by the investor; and any restrictions on sharing information that engages conflicts of interest or which is privileged.
Even with such an agreement in place, a director must always ensure he or she is acting in the best interest of the corporation when sharing information. A director cannot contract out of this fiduciary duty.
Nominee directors of public companies must also consider whether the information constitutes material non-public information. If so, it should only be shared in the “necessary course of business” – that is, for a purpose that is essential, indispensable, or requisite to the business of the corporation.
An Ontario court’s August, 2024 decision in OneMove Capital Corporation v. Dye & Durham Limited addressed the ability of a shareholder to remove and replace its nominee director before the expiry of their term of service on the board.
The court confirmed that despite wording in the corporate statute (in this case, the OBCA) that allows a shareholder to submit a proposal to their corporation to discuss “any matter” at a meeting of shareholders, a shareholder cannot use a proposal to simply remove a director, because the OBCA provides for certain procedural rights for a director who is proposed to be removed.
However, the court found that the nominating shareholder retained its statutory right to request the removal of its nominee, so long as it did so at a properly constituted shareholder meeting called for that purpose.
Before consenting to act as a director you should seek independent legal advice. You should talk to your lawyer about putting in place an indemnification agreement and confirm that the corporation for which you will be acting has directors’ and officers’, or “D&O”, insurance in place. You should have your lawyer review this policy as well.
Where you live can matter when it comes to serving as a director.
Being invited to serve as a corporate director can be an honour and a very fulfilling experience. It can also be an effective way to build your professional network, and can even be the basis for a full-time career. Just be sure to keep the following takeaways in mind:
© SkyLaw 2025. All rights reserved.
SkyLaw's blog does not contain legal or financial advice. It is for informational purposes only and should not be used as a substitute for professional advice from a lawyer. SkyLaw's blog posts are subject to copyright and may not be reproduced without permission. If you have any questions or would like further information, please contact us. A member of our team would be delighted to speak with you.