This is a big change.
SECTION 133.
Question proposed : " That Section 133 stand part of the Bill."
Yes.
It is a mandatory 21 days notice, notwithstanding what is in the articles and in view of the seven days' notice in section 67 of the old Act, it seems rather drastic, particularly for a private company, although I appreciate you can short-circuit it.
Seven days for a private company surely?
Yes.
That is not the annual meeting; that is only a meeting other than the annual meeting.
Yes.
I think I am right in that?
Yes.
Surely the only case in which you would require a very urgent meeting is in the case of a meeting other than the annual general meeting? The annual general meeting is a routine thing.
It is often forgotten.
I agree it is very often forgotten but it is a matter of routine.
It is considered that short notice periods could be unfair to a shareholder who might dissent from some proposals which are to be put to the annual meeting and who might require some time to consult his financial or legal adviser and would require at least 21 days' notice in order to do anything like that.
Have any representations been made to the Minister about this by any bodies?
Mr. Lynch
No, there have been no representations. Incidentally, subsection (3) provides for shorter notice where all the shareholders agree.
Yes, but they can only agree at the meeting.
No. They could agree by somebody consulting the members in advance, particularly in the case of a small company.
Yes, it could be done in that way.
Question put and agreed to.