Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

If the court doesn't act on this it means nobody ever has to follow a court order | 555 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

If the court doesn't act on this it means nobody ever has to follow a court order

Authored by: soronlin on Sunday, October 28 2012 @ 05:46 AM EDT

I was told by someone on the board of a relatively small private limited
company, that as the secretary he did have to wave the resignation stick on
occasion. So it seems that the PLC rule did not apply then (pre 1995).

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

If the court doesn't act on this it means nobody ever has to follow a court order - Authored by: Wol on Sunday, October 28 2012 @ 01:24 PM EDT

If the court doesn't act on this it means nobody ever has to follow a court order

Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, October 28 2012 @ 05:12 PM EDT

If it's changed from a turnover rule to a plc rule in the last five years, then that would make sense.

The change may have been in 2006 (to 2009) with the Companies Act 2006 (enforced in stages) which has formalised previous and case law.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )