https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97730 The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff company in a case involving a claim for damages for conspiracy and breach of contract against an architect and estate agents. The defendants argued that the acquisition of a building lease was ultra vires for the plaintiff company based on the "main objects" rule limiting its activities to exporting and importing goods. However, the court found that the company's memorandum of association allowed for broader activities, including property development. The court held that the project was within the company's authorized activities, rejecting the defendants' ultra vires argument. en-us Wed, 20 Jul 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Feb 2018 11:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97730 The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff company in a case involving a claim for damages for conspiracy and breach of contract against an architect and estate agents. The defendants argued that the acquisition of a building lease was ultra vires for the plaintiff company based on the "main objects" rule limiting its activities to exporting and importing goods. However, the court found that the company's memorandum of association allowed for broader activities, including property development. The court held that the project was within the company's authorized activities, rejecting the defendants' ultra vires argument. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 20 Jul 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97730