Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar

Special Committee Companies Bill, 1962 díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 6 Mar 1963


Question proposed : " That Section 134 stand part of the Bill."

Is there anything new in this?

The changes are not of any great substance. It might be mentioned that the provisions of this section have effect only in so far as the articles of association do not provide otherwise for that purpose.

In clause (b) of Section 134, a certain percentage of the capital can call a meeting. Does that mean any kind of meeting?

And it is consistent? It does not overlap with Sections 132 and 131?

No, it does not.

In paragraph (a), I think there may be a small drafting point. Should provision not be made for the incorporation of Tábla A as well as Table A?

No. We asked the draftsman and it is not necessary because it refers to the manner in which notices are to be given and the manner in both cases is the same, as Tábla A is a translation of the other. We asked the draftsman specifically about this point.

In regard to paragraph (e), in the case of a company originally having share capital, does that not mean every company except those which originally had not a share capital?

Can you not change from one kind to the other?

Yes, but I imagine the intention of this is to cover a company which originally had share capital and now has not.

No, I would say not. Its intention is to deal with a case where a company originally had a share capital but not a case where a company originally did not have a share capital. I presume the reason would be that where you had a company that did not have a share capital initially, an arrangement giving a vote for so much stock held would not be very appropriate. I think that is the explanation.

What I am wondering about is will these only apply in so far as they are not excluded by the articles?

That is right.

Because a company originally having share capital, I think, means the type of company you mention and also it means the kind of company which started with share capital?

That is true.

However, I do not think it is relevant if it is only subject to the articles.

It is only subject to the articles which can be more restrictive or more liberal.

Question put and agreed to.