MASSEY V WALES; MASSEY V COONEY (2004) 47 ACSR 1
Abstract:In the recent case Massey v Cooney the New South Wales Court of Appeal encountered the exact question as to whether a deadlock in the board enables the general meeting to exercise its reserve powers to ratify an unauthorized proceeding initiated in the name of the company where the management of the company was given to the board through an article that was identical to reg. 66(1). It is therefore worthwhile to take a look at the decision in this case and consider in what ways it will impact on the development of the jurisprudence on the division of corporate powers in Australia. The note is organized into three parts. Part B introduces the facts of the case. Part C examines how this case was decided. Part D evaluates the judgment of Hodgson J.
Document Type: Research Article
Publication date: January 1, 2006
More about this publication?
- The Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal (OUCLJ) is the flagship journal of Oxford University's postgraduate law community, produced under the aegis of the Law Faculty.
It is published twice-yearly and endeavours to foster international academic debate and exchange on a wide range of legal topics of interest throughout the Commonwealth.