Atain Xo
a
"must "carry on" of Law Repo
But
"In ode that
Company may
benefit of
X
H. K.
Ord. it
it's business
H. K
her Stubbs
Mr. Collins
512
G
"If This Count
cannot stop any suit at
ܬܵܐ
all
which
bre
brought
The place where
Ne
Company
carries on its
business such
95.
a
Co
Conne
be registered
The question then for decision
amendments should be
H..
newTMTMTM
under Ne Act"
made
X
Companies
· Bill
to provide for the state of
Disclosed
indrated by the judgment
Piggott.
what
Na
Page 203.
x for which 25810/10
See 25810
I have read these pop but do not propose to minati
ab
ane leave, the until cos receive the furtives pop. mentinad on 4948 and all the he, at points are completely
befor us.
Brinth, - sofor
في
as the case has developed at presut-
uracy observe :-
Y. Both in his judgment in his minuti of 17 Nov To
affairs
Viz F.
д
бидует suggestions
will
be
found
in
his minute
8
fr
Nov.
Letter f
8th Now)
nut
What
No Gov=to
2/
M. Bees Davies
Sir & de Saumenez (in his letter
says Nar
he
have the impression Dat the Supreme
1
of China & Corea
has
H.M. Co.
winding up
Cont
machinery for
in respect of its
within the jurisdiction of
asset!
Court.
Six # de Saumarez
Large
visit Sin F. Lugard Latte. ir telegram (39471)
and
presumably Karepan
That
x
goning Dec 26 : Yo
1J
batend
with the former 's
Dec 262
connected
Visit
едн 88741 17/1/11
Si, J.Piggott seems to
1865
in seekove, to construe the
It's ade of robo in the light of the English C. Act of
1862
on
which it was
founded to comprese throne koo--enactments one with another so as to lose
Sight of their resfuction affects - It is not rou plasi
in some passages whether he means refer to the Ack of the ongo
ما
The simple fact of course is that language used
cunctment
the harperial Park with it
unlimited jurisdiction mac
offret when reproduced
dir
havr
L
any different
mactment of the
Ith her ich tune, the jurisdiction
is territorially limited.
Si 7. Piggetto suegotions
Exlet
M
بست
f
which
L
based to
considerable
is at
the li's assumption that there
present no
Comprane, law in Existeren in Shane har,
the English Compamis Act's not having been applies
to Clericia expussly by Rine.
Sir It de dusmanz in his letter of 8 Nor To
contradicts ave
such assumption havive, rezaci
If the General "ommitus clause" I think he is right
in the
1904
Дайс
At ane, rati le to master of the situation, since
lu
can hold us his Corest that the Treylish Compferm's Acts (es ratives the consolidating Act of 1902 now) are
or
(or cl
M
force
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.