<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1966 (4) TMI 42 - IN THE CHANCERY DIVISION</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98286</link>
    <description>Quasi-partnership status operates subject to the company&#039;s articles. A participant&#039;s bankruptcy did not justify compulsory winding up where the articles provided for transmission of that participant&#039;s interest to the trustee. Sale of the business and investment of proceeds remained within the company&#039;s objects, while profit-sharing did not establish unfairness, a legitimate loss of confidence, or a device to defeat the trustee because no binding remuneration entitlement existed and little work had been performed. Following resignation, the quasi-partnership relationship ended and the trustee held only a minority shareholder position. The winding-up petition failed on the pleaded just and equitable grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:45:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135343" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1966 (4) TMI 42 - IN THE CHANCERY DIVISION</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98286</link>
      <description>Quasi-partnership status operates subject to the company&#039;s articles. A participant&#039;s bankruptcy did not justify compulsory winding up where the articles provided for transmission of that participant&#039;s interest to the trustee. Sale of the business and investment of proceeds remained within the company&#039;s objects, while profit-sharing did not establish unfairness, a legitimate loss of confidence, or a device to defeat the trustee because no binding remuneration entitlement existed and little work had been performed. Following resignation, the quasi-partnership relationship ended and the trustee held only a minority shareholder position. The winding-up petition failed on the pleaded just and equitable grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98286</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>