Abstract
This article focuses on the tests and legal doctrine employed by courts to determine when a business opportunity discovered by a company director or senior employee should be regarded as a ‘corporate opportunity’ (i.e. one belonging to the company). The article is significant for revealing misleading associations or analogies some NZ courts have developed. Analysis of leading NZ, commonwealth and US case law suggests that NZ lawyers are in danger of developing a corporate opportunity doctrine that is unable to respond to the changing role of directors. Building on commonwealth and US case law the article proposes key components in a new theoretical structure designed to explain when a business opportunity belongs to the company.