42
for use in emergency situations and we think
that the recommended amendments make this clearer.
The recommendation in the paragraph (b), that a
provisional liquidator must be qualified is thought
to be necessary in order to prevent the appointment
of "cowboy" liquidators by unscrupulous directors. There
are, of course, no specific requirements for a liquidator
appointed under the other winding up provisions in the
Companies Ordinance to possess any qualifications.
However, there are sufficient safeguards to prevent
an obviously unsuitable person being appointed.
For example, Section 193 of the Ordinance, which deals
with the appointment of an 'ordinary' provisional
liquidator (i.e. other than one appointed under
Section 228A) provides that he shall be appointed by
the court and that "either the Official Receiver or
any other fit person may be appointed". (Our emphasis)
There are no such safeguards in the existing provisions
of Section 228A and we feel that, having regard to the
circumstances in which the Section is likely to be
used in practice, the recommended amendment is necessary.
Some people feel that there should be a requirement for
all liquidators to possess certain qualifications, as is
now the case in, for example, Britain. This is something
we intend to look at in due course but we feel that
Section 228A should be amended as recommended as soon
as possible, in the meantime. The recommendations in (d)
and (e) repeat the provisions of the existing paragraphs
(a) and (c).
/43.