Section 399 consent and share register correction rules defeated the challenge to maintainability of the company petition.

Consent under section 399(3) must be specific to the petition, allegations and reliefs, and the consenting members must apply their minds to the proceedings; on the facts, the challenge to maintainability failed. The validity of a petition is assessed at the date of presentation, so later withdrawal of consent or subsequent events did not defeat maintainability. The company could not unilaterally delete names from the share register; any correction had to be made in accordance with law. The application to strike off the main petition was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the application for dismissal of the main petition was maintainable on the grounds that the petitioners lacked the requisite share qualification, that the consent in writing under section 399(3) was not valid, and that the company had lawfully removed the petitioners' names from the share register.

Analysis: Consent under section 399(3) must relate to a specific petition, specific allegations, and specific reliefs, and the consenting members must apply their minds to the proceedings. The validity of a petition is to be judged on the facts existing at the time of presentation, and subsequent withdrawal of consent or later events do not destroy maintainability. The directors could not, on their own, rectify the register by deleting names already entered, as any correction of the register had to be pursued in accordance with law and not by unilateral action. The materials therefore did not justify striking the main petition off the file.

Conclusion: The application for dismissal of the main petition was rejected and the challenge to the petitioners' maintainability failed.

---