About: Lipschitz v Wolpert and Abrahams     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon
http://dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com/c/5zqonVxzHY

In Lipschitz and Another NNO v Wolpert and Abrahams an important case in South African law, the auditors of a company in liquidation were sued under section 184 of the Companies Act to contribute an amount in excess of R3 million to the company's assets as compensation. An exception was successfully filed to the particulars of claim on the basis that an auditor, appointed under section 98 (1) of the 1926 Companies Act, was not an "officer of the company" within the meaning of the phrase in section 184 (1). Holmes JA quoted section 184(1) to the following effect:

AttributesValues
rdfs:label
  • Lipschitz v Wolpert and Abrahams (en)
rdfs:comment
  • In Lipschitz and Another NNO v Wolpert and Abrahams an important case in South African law, the auditors of a company in liquidation were sued under section 184 of the Companies Act to contribute an amount in excess of R3 million to the company's assets as compensation. An exception was successfully filed to the particulars of claim on the basis that an auditor, appointed under section 98 (1) of the 1926 Companies Act, was not an "officer of the company" within the meaning of the phrase in section 184 (1). Holmes JA quoted section 184(1) to the following effect: (en)
dct:subject
Wikipage page ID
Wikipage revision ID
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
sameAs
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
has abstract
  • In Lipschitz and Another NNO v Wolpert and Abrahams an important case in South African law, the auditors of a company in liquidation were sued under section 184 of the Companies Act to contribute an amount in excess of R3 million to the company's assets as compensation. An exception was successfully filed to the particulars of claim on the basis that an auditor, appointed under section 98 (1) of the 1926 Companies Act, was not an "officer of the company" within the meaning of the phrase in section 184 (1). Holmes JA quoted section 184(1) to the following effect: Where in the course of winding-up a company it appears that any person who has taken part in the formation or promotion of the company, or any past or present director, manager or liquidator, or any officer of the company, has misapplied or retained or become liable or accountable for any money or property of the company, or been guilty of any misfeasance or breach of trust in relation to the company, the Court may, on the application of the Master or of the liquidator or of any creditor or contributory, examine into the conduct of the promoter, director, manager, liquidator, or officer, and compel him to repay or restore the money or property or any part thereof, respectively with interest at such rate as the Court thinks just, or to contribute such sum to the assets of the company by way of compensation in respect of the misapplication, retention, misfeasance or breach of trust as the Court thinks just. (en)
prov:wasDerivedFrom
page length (characters) of wiki page
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage of
is Wikipage redirect of
is foaf:primaryTopic of
Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git147 as of Sep 06 2024


Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE     Content Formats:   [cxml] [csv]     RDF   [text] [turtle] [ld+json] [rdf+json] [rdf+xml]     ODATA   [atom+xml] [odata+json]     Microdata   [microdata+json] [html]    About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3331 as of Sep 2 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 49 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software