Skip to main content
Normal View

Special Committee Companies Bill, 1962 debate -
Wednesday, 10 Apr 1963

SECTION 360.

Question proposed: " That Section 360 stand part of the Bill."

This is much the same as Section 274 (6) of the old Act.

" Place of business," I notice, has a certain definition there: share transfer and share registration office. You have a definition there.

Getting close to what you want.

It is hardly a definition.

Is there not rather an unusual definition or use of the word " director "? We read:

" director " in relation to a company includes any person in accordance with whose directions and instructions the directors of the company are accustomed to act;

The definition is used in a number of other provisions throughout the Act with the object of including those persons who, though not nominally directors of the company, effectively use the powers of directors.

I accept that.

I want to ask a question about Section 360 following Deputy Norton's statement: "director" includes . . . any person in accordance with whose directions and instructions the directors of the company are accustomed to act. In the case of a foreign company, if there is a foreign company—a company incorporated in England, say—and there is somebody in that capacity there which really does not affect the situation here, must that be stated under the returns in Section 353? In other words, in this particular case, although you have it everywhere else, in the case of a foreign company should that not be followed up? " Director " is too wide in this section only.

It is not too wide, really. If the local directors are mere nominees and have no real powers——

But this is a foreign company. You would have the official directors of that, the foreign company, but you may not be able to go behind the scenes completely. It may be somebody in England, somebody completely outside the control of the State. Supposing you had a company from England trading here. The names of the directors would be in accordance with English law—whatever may be the English law. That is fair enough, on the face of it, over here but, simply because you cannot enforce it, I do not think it is wise in the section. Will the Minister consider that?

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share