Dliodoir2021 wrote: » RE WILLIAMS TULLAMORE I can't figure out whether the judge granted §212 (ex 205) or not? He seems to have said it was oppression but didn't.....arghhh idk! Any ideas? Would it be bad to just exclude it from my notes?
Iso_123 wrote: » The points i have for this case are that one act is sufficient for a finding of oppression and also this is the main case on 212(1)(b) ie acting in disregard to a members interest. I have down that it was found that they had acted in disregard to the interests of the minority shareholders (open to correction on this?) I haven't read the judgment just have this from my notes/manual
Dliodoir2021 wrote: » Thanks for the reply. I'd actually cut it but will re-add now! I also had this which caused confusion: - “Why would Barrington J not simply have decided the case on the second limb of §205 (now §212), as Courtney suggests he could have done?” - “Although the learned judge grounded his jurisdiction to make an order bc the affairs of the co were being conducted in disregard of the interests of the ordinary shareholders, Courtney feels it is remarkable that Barrington J tagged onto his view the observation that to implement the resolutions would be oppressive: sufficient jurisdiction existed for the court to make an Order under §212 on the finding that the affairs of the co were being conducted in disregard of the ordinary shareholders interests.” [Courtney 3rd edn at 11.031]"
FE1new wrote: » Hi All Would anyone have Criminal notes they are willing to swap? I have EU notes and sample answers and Equity and Property sample answers. I haven't studied Criminal since 1st year and have zero notes prepared With the exams in 2 weeks I'm panicking
Lallers96 wrote: » Is anyone else ****ting it over this sudden mock exam and the fact that we know absolutely nothing about what time it's at, what we will be tested on, how long it will be etc? I don't think I can get the day off work so I'll have to hope that this can be done on my lunch break or something. It's in less than 5 days like and no information given.
Aoibhin511 wrote: » I've been giving this more thought, they definitely just called it a dumb name, it can't be a mock exam because what would they examine? Which of the 8 subjects do they examine? If they asked a q on a subject I hadn't covered and I was a non-law grad i would be just sat there staring at the screen unable to even attempt it, or worst case scenario it would completely freak me out and i would go into panick mode. I think it must just a dry run of the set up, can everyone log in ok, can the platform handle x amount of people etc
lilyc223 wrote: » Would anyone be so kind as to send me just the Competition Law chapter of an EU manual?
Lawwww2020 wrote: » Thank you! Have they got back to you on it? I received the email from last week so not sure what’s wrong!
kayleee123 wrote: » Does anyone have the spring 2020 constitutional paper by any chance?
CiaraND16 wrote: » What topics are people doing for company? Are people leaving out receivership because it came up in March? Predictions welcome!
ellachapman96 wrote: » Hi does anyone have an up to date criminal law grid they could give me please? I’m working off one only up to 2017 thanks
LawStudent96 wrote: » Would anyone have sample answers for Constitutional please? Can swap plenty stuff, incl. March 2020 papers. Thanks