FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218  
219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   >>   >|  
much, indeed, to say that the fastening of an onerous or improvident contract on a company at its start, by interested promoters acting in collusion with the directors, has been the principal cause of the scandals associated with company promotion. Concurrently with the adoption of the contract for the acquisition of the property which is the company's _raison d'etre_, the directors have to consider how they will best get the company's capital subscribed. Down to the passing of the Companies Act 1900 the usual mode of doing this was to issue a prospectus inviting the public to subscribe for shares. After the act of 1900 the prospectus fell into general disuse. In the year 1903, out of a total of 3596 companies which registered, only 358 issued a prospectus, the directors preferring, it would seem, to place the share capital through the medium of brokers, financial agents and other intermediaries rather than run the risk of incurring, personally, liability under the stringent provisions for disclosure contained in the act (s. 10). Of late the prospectus has, however, returned into favour. Under the act of 1907, incorporated in the Consolidation Act 1908 (s. 82), a company, if it does not issue a prospectus, must file a statement of all the material facts relating to the company. Prospectus. A prospectus is an invitation to the public to take shares on the faith of the statements therein contained, and is thus the basis of the agreement to take the shares; there therefore rests on those who are responsible for its issue an obligation to act with the most perfect good faith--_uberrima fides_--and this obligation has been repeatedly emphasized by judges of the highest eminence. (See the observations of Kindersley, V.C., in _New Brunswick Railway Co._ v. _Muggeridge_, 1860, 1 Dr. & Sm. 383, and of Lord Herschell in _Derry_ v. _Peek_, 1889, 14 A. C. 376.) Directors must be perfectly candid with the public; they must not only state what they do state with strict and scrupulous accuracy, but they must not omit any fact which, if disclosed, would falsify the statements made. This is the general obligation of directors when issuing a prospectus; but on this general obligation the legislature has engrafted special requirements. By the Companies Act 1867, it required the dates and names of the parties to any contract entered into by the company or its promoters or directors before the issue of the prospectus, to be disc
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218  
219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

prospectus

 

company

 
directors
 

obligation

 

public

 

shares

 

general

 

contract

 

capital

 

Companies


statements

 

contained

 

promoters

 

eminence

 

emphasized

 

highest

 
judges
 

relating

 

observations

 

invitation


Kindersley

 

Prospectus

 

repeatedly

 

perfect

 
responsible
 

material

 

uberrima

 
agreement
 

issuing

 
legislature

engrafted
 
disclosed
 

falsify

 

special

 

requirements

 

parties

 

entered

 
required
 
accuracy
 

scrupulous


Herschell

 
Railway
 
Muggeridge
 

statement

 

candid

 

strict

 
perfectly
 

Directors

 

Brunswick

 

subscribed