Walters, A ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5854-4655, 2002. Section 35A and quorum requirements: confusion reigns. Company Lawyer, 23 (11), pp. 325-326. ISSN 0144-1027
Preview |
Text
187343_4987 Walters Publisher.pdf Download (27kB) | Preview |
Abstract
Engaged as it is in the Herculean task of drafting the Companies Bill, the DTI would be well advised to consider the implications of Smith v. Henniker-Major & Co. This case has spawned four judgments in the higher courts, each giving a different reading to section 35A of the Companies Act 1985, leaving the law in a highly unsatisfactory state.
Item Type: | Journal article |
---|---|
Publication Title: | Company Lawyer |
Creators: | Walters, A. |
Publisher: | Sweet & Maxwell/Thomson Reuters |
Place of Publication: | London |
Date: | 2002 |
Volume: | 23 |
Number: | 11 |
ISSN: | 0144-1027 |
Rights: | Permission is for Nottingham Trent University’s Institutional Repository only. Any further use (including storage, transmission or reproduction by electronic means) shall be the subject of a separate application for permission. |
Divisions: | Schools > Nottingham Law School |
Record created by: | EPrints Services |
Date Added: | 09 Oct 2015 09:46 |
Last Modified: | 09 Jun 2017 13:10 |
URI: | https://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/2583 |
Actions (login required)
Edit View |
Statistics
Views
Views per month over past year
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year