Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Recall of ex parte orders requires a showing of sufficient cause for non-appearance, whereas review is confined to an error apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal found no sufficient cause where repeated opportunities had been granted, including a final opportunity after the applicant was already proceeded ex parte, yet the applicant remained absent. Illness and death in one partner's family and lapse of previous counsel were held insufficient, especially when other partners of the firm also gave no explanation. The request to place additional material on record, including a later Supreme Court decision, was not considered because recall itself failed. The recall applications were dismissed.
Recall of ex parte orders requires a showing of sufficient cause for non-appearance, whereas review is confined to an error apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal found no sufficient cause where repeated opportunities had been granted, including a final opportunity after the applicant was already proceeded ex parte, yet the applicant remained absent. Illness and death in one partner's family and lapse of previous counsel were held insufficient, especially when other partners of the firm also gave no explanation. The request to place additional material on record, including a later Supreme Court decision, was not considered because recall itself failed. The recall applications were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
