“Coupling this offering with our best-in-class lottery distribution platform, we are able to deliver a seamless online experience for players in the most secure way possible.” Lotto.com partners QuickChek to launch in New Jersey Read the full story on iGB North America. Topics: Lottery Online lottery Lottery AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to FacebookFacebookShare to TwitterTwitter Headquartered in New Jersey, Lotto.com is a registered courier of the New Jersey Lottery and only the second licensed lottery courier in the US. 7th June 2021 | By Robert Fletcher Subscribe to the iGaming newsletter Regions: New Jersey Lotto.com, a digital platform for buying lottery tickets, has linked up with convenience store chain QuickChek to launch in the US state of New Jersey. Tags: Lottery QuickChek Lotto.com QuickChek will serve as the exclusive retail partner of Lotto.com in New Jersey and allow the platform to promote its services to consumers via the chain’s 138 stores across the state. “At Lotto.com we are on a mission to increase contributions to good causes, tying them to every ticket sold,” Lotto.com chief executive Thomas Metzger said. “To help us achieve this, we’ve partnered with QuickChek, a leader in convenience and service. Email Address
Econet Wireless Zimbabwe Limited (ECO.zw) listed on the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange under the Technology sector has released it’s 2009 circular For more information about Econet Wireless Zimbabwe Limited (ECO.zw) reports, abridged reports, interim earnings results and earnings presentations, visit the Econet Wireless Zimbabwe Limited (ECO.zw) company page on AfricanFinancials.Document: Econet Wireless Zimbabwe Limited (ECO.zw) 2009 circular Company ProfileEconet Wireless Zimbabwe is a diversified telecommunications group; it is the largest enterprise of its kind in Zimbabwe and the largest company on the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange in terms of market capitalisation. Econet Wireless Zimbabwe provides products and solutions for mobile and fixed wireless telephony, public payphones, internet access and payment solutions. In 2009, Econet Wireless Zimbabwe became the first operator in Zimbabwe to launch data services with 3G capability. This was followed by an extensive project to expand its geographic coverage; building a fibre-optic network, providing financial transaction switching and point-of-sale and value-added retail support services. The company is a subsidiary of a privately-owned group controlled by its founder, Strive Masiyiwa. The group’s subsidiaries include Econet Global, Econet Wireless Africa, Econet Wireless International, Econet Enterprises, Liquid Telecom Group and Econet Media.
Lucara Diamonds Corporation (LUC.bw) listed on the Botswana Stock Exchange under the Mining sector has released it’s 2017 presentation results for the half year.For more information about Lucara Diamonds Corporation (LUC.bw) reports, abridged reports, interim earnings results and earnings presentations, visit the Lucara Diamonds Corporation (LUC.bw) company page on AfricanFinancials.Document: Lucara Diamonds Corporation (LUC.bw) 2017 presentation results for the half year.Company ProfileLucara Diamond Corporation is a diamond exploration and mining company which operates in southern Africa. Its principal asset is the wholly-owned Karowe Mine in Botswana where Lesidi La Rona was found; the world’s second largest gem-quality diamond. Karowe Mine consistently produces large Type IIA stones and has an estimated worth of $US2.2 billion unmined diamonds. Lucara Diamond Corporation also has interests in the Mothae Diamond Project in Lesotho and the Kavango Diamond Project in Namibia. The company was previously known as Bannockburn Resources Limited, but the name was changed to Lucara Diamond Corporation in 2007. Lucara Diamond Corporation is a member of the Lundin Group of Companies with its head office based in Vancouver, Canada.
Image source: Getty Images. Kirsteen Mackay | Friday, 28th May, 2021 | More on: GHT Grab your free report – while it’s online. Enter Your Email Address Kirsteen has no position in any of the shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has no position in any of the shares mentioned. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. I would like to receive emails from you about product information and offers from The Fool and its business partners. Each of these emails will provide a link to unsubscribe from future emails. More information about how The Fool collects, stores, and handles personal data is available in its Privacy Statement. Looking back a bit further, the Gresham share price rose between 2016 and 2018, but collapsed by almost 70% by early 2019. It remains below those 2018 highs today, but certainly seems to be back on the right trajectory.The reason for this share price collapse was a drop in its earnings. Delays to collecting revenue from new projects caused licensing fees to fall. This caused its adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortisation (EBITDA) to plunge a whopping 83%.Nevertheless, fast-forward to this year and revenues are much improved. Its adjusted EBITDA came in at £4.5m, up from £4.1m in 2019 and £0.9m in 2018.Notable customer baseGresham’s core product, Clareti, is proving popular among leading investment banks and other financial institutions. Clareti is an industry leading cloud-based, data control platform. Financial services is a time-sensitive business and this platform helps companies ensure accurate data and real-time connectivity.Growth stocks are undoubtedly riskier investments than well-established companies and Gresham’s blip post-2018 illustrates this risk. However, I think the financial services industry is becoming more dominant than ever, as retail interest in investing rises.Gresham is a global fintech company with clear potential. Fintech is a loose term often applied to anything crossing the boundaries of financial and technology, which Gresham clearly does. But Gresham has been serving the financial industry for over 20 years, so it’s not a newcomer to the space. Nevertheless, it’s a competitive field in which many major companies are causing disruption.In addition to competition, other risks facing the Gresham share price include failing to win new business, existing customers cancelling, product failure, and rising operational costs.As Gresham appears to be building a scalable business with notable clients, I’m tempted to invest and add GHT shares to my Stocks and Shares ISA. See all posts by Kirsteen Mackay Our 6 ‘Best Buys Now’ Shares Simply click below to discover how you can take advantage of this. A small-cap growth stock scaling up through M&A – should I invest? Renowned stock-picker Mark Rogers and his analyst team at The Motley Fool UK have named 6 shares that they believe UK investors should consider buying NOW.So if you’re looking for more stock ideas to try and best position your portfolio today, then it might be a good day for you. Because we’re offering a full 33% off your first year of membership to our flagship share-tipping service, backed by our ‘no quibbles’ 30-day subscription fee refund guarantee. For regular stock market investing ideas and help to choose the best shares to buy now, sign up to The Motley Fool today. Looking for new share ideas?Grab this FREE report now.Inside, you discover one FTSE company with a runaway snowball of profits.From 2015-2019…Revenues increased 38.6%.Its net income went up 19.7 times!Since 2012, revenues from regular users have almost DOUBLEDThe opportunity here really is astounding.In fact, one of its own board members recently snapped up 25,000 shares using their own money… So why sit on the side lines a minute longer?You could have the full details on this company right now. One FTSE “Snowball Stock” With Runaway Revenues Growth stock Gresham Technologies (LSE: GHT), is a software services provider assisting enterprise companies with compliance and risk management, among other things. Its share price has soared in the past year and it’s scaling up through M&A. Is this a growth opportunity worth investing in?A growth stock growing through acquisitionThis week, Gresham Tech announced it’s proposing to buy Electra Information Systems. This is a US-based company providing software solutions and services for processing trading data, to buy-side companies such as institutional portfolio managers.5G is here – and shares of this ‘sleeping giant’ could be a great way for you to potentially profit!According to one leading industry firm, the 5G boom could create a global industry worth US$12.3 TRILLION out of thin air…And if you click here we’ll show you something that could be key to unlocking 5G’s full potential…Gresham will buy Electra using existing cash resources and a share placing. The total price to be paid is $38.6m (£27.2m) including a £21m share fundraise. Last year, Electra generated revenues of £10.1m, while Gresham generated £24.8m. Therefore, the Electra acquisition should accelerate Gresham’s earnings growth quickly.Gresham’s current customers include many of the world’s largest financial institutions from banking, investment management, and financial services. Therefore, I believe this acquisition should complement Gresham’s existing business. It should also help Gresham make inroads in the US, providing an opportunity to grow the business further.Gresham’s fluctuating share priceGresham is a growth stock with a £117m market cap, a high price-to-earnings ratio (P/E) at 93, and a dividend yield of 0.45%. It makes money from subscription-based offerings.This past year has seen the Gresham share price soar. Today, it’s down 6% from its 52-week high and up 62% from its 52-week low.
Photographs: Namgoong SunText description provided by the architects. Four Facades Save this picture!© Namgoong SunRecommended ProductsEnclosures / Double Skin FacadesRodecaRound Facade at Omnisport Arena ApeldoornEnclosures / Double Skin FacadesIsland Exterior FabricatorsCurtain Wall Facade SystemsEnclosures / Double Skin FacadesFranken-SchotterFacade System – LINEAEnclosures / Double Skin FacadesAlucoilStructural Honeycomb Panels – LarcoreOf course, there are facade, right side and left side and rear side in this building. But, the side which has an entrance is called as facade for convenience sake and each side insists on the individualities with different appearance for the city. The left side is facade for the north side. The right side is facade for the south side. The rear side is facade for the east side. Layers Save this picture!© Namgoong SunSeveral layers were made by digging the lump of cube and empty out it. Such layers are used as the equipment including useful external space, such as balcony, terrace, etc. in the intervals and the equipment of visual pleasure through the sense of depth. Save this picture!© Namgoong SunContext Generally, when starting the design, people find the clue of design by observing the situation around the land. When the clue is positive, it is reflected to the design. But, when it’s negative, it’s blocked and neglected. Save this picture!© Namgoong SunIn this project, the land of building is located in the area of city which is changed rapidly, so the surroundings are very disorder. It was confused that buildings of various uses are existed by various forms, materials, colors and arrangements. So, the strategy of blocking and neglect is selected. Decently! Toughly! Orderly! I hope that the surface of this building can be a strong peel blocking the surrounding situation. I hope that it can be neat princeliness in disorder. Save this picture!plan 02Balconies of three Types In this building, the balconies of three types were designed. When tired by work, it’s the balcony to see the city with cigarette alone. The balcony which is good for the chat of two or three people . c. The balcony for party The balcony which is good for noisy… external cocktail party, sometimes, barbecue party.Project gallerySee allShow less2012 Architectural League Prize Winners AnnouncedArticles19th Annual Canstruction® Raises Hunger Awareness with Food Drive ExhibitArticlesProject locationAddress:Songpa-gu, Seoul, South KoreaLocation to be used only as a reference. It could indicate city/country but not exact address. Share CopyAbout this officeOh Jong SangOfficeFollow#TagsProjectsBuilt ProjectsSelected ProjectsResidential ArchitectureHousingDabasSeoulOffice Buildings3D ModelingSouth KoreaPublished on April 24, 2012Cite: “YI Building / Oh Jong Sang” 24 Apr 2012. ArchDaily. Accessed 11 Jun 2021.
News May 27, 2003 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Minister bans new radio station from starting up May 19, 2021 Find out more Receive email alerts News CameroonAfrica RSF_en Help by sharing this information CameroonAfrica Organisation to go further News Case against Amadou Vamoulké baseless, French lawyers tell Cameroon court Cameroonian journalist Paul Chouta sentenced and fined in defamation case Follow the news on Cameroon News May 31, 2021 Find out more Cameroonian reporter jailed since August, abandoned by justice system Reporters Without Borders today denounced as a “serious attack on press freedom” the Cameroon government’s closing of a new radio station on 23 May a day before it was due to go on the air.Police surrounded the offices in Douala of the privately-owned station, Freedom FM, and closed it on the orders of communications minister Jacques Fame Ndongo, who said it did not have permission to broadcast.”This uncalled-for measure is also a severe blow to news diversity in Cameroon,” said Reporters Without Borders secretary-general Robert Ménard in a letter to the minister. “The government knew perfectly well how important the station was since most Cameroonians listen to radio stations to find out what’s going on. The closure was just an attempt to stop people getting a balanced view of President Paul Biya’s record in the run-up to next year’s presidential elections.”Reporters Without Borders has already expressed concern at the government’s closure on 19 February of two privately-owned TV stations, RTA and Canal 2. Independent broadcasting media are officially allowed but are forced to operate illegally since the authorities do not respond to licence requests. The press freedom organisation called on the government to legalise all the broadcast media and especially allow Freedom FM to operate.Minister Ndongo said in a statement that the closure of Freedom FM had, “in accordance with the rules, put an end to a flagrant and obvious example of illegal broadcasting.” He claimed the station had never applied for a licence, but the station’s agent, Pius Njawe, who is head of the Le Messager media group, told Reporters Without Borders that he had. “It’s a lie. We completed all the formalities. The ministry even sent technicians to inspect our equipment,” he said. April 23, 2021 Find out more
Top StoriesThreshold Requirement Brought So That Other Homebuyers & Creditors Are Not Hurt: Centre Defends IBC Amendment Act 2020 Mehal Jain8 Oct 2020 7:59 PMShare This – xThe Supreme Court on Thursday heard the Centre in a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of conditions introduced by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2020, on the homebuyers’ right to file insolvency petitions against defaulting builders. A Bench of Justices R. F. Nariman, Navin Sinha and K. M. Joseph heard arguments advanced by Additional…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Supreme Court on Thursday heard the Centre in a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of conditions introduced by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2020, on the homebuyers’ right to file insolvency petitions against defaulting builders. A Bench of Justices R. F. Nariman, Navin Sinha and K. M. Joseph heard arguments advanced by Additional Solicitor General Madhavi Diwan.The petitions challenge Section 3 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act 2020. The said provision, adds certain provisos to Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) to state there should be at least one hundred real estate allottees or ten percentage of the total number of allottees, whichever is lesser, to maintain an insolvency petition in respect of a real estate project. The amendment also states that the application of Section 3 of the amendment Act shall be retrospective, affecting pending applications. Also, the threshold limit for initiating insolvency proceedings has been increased from INR 1 Lakh to INR 1 Crore”The concept of ‘going solo’ has been long diluted by Your Lordships in Pioneer(decision). To iron out the creases, Your Lordships had held that 51% votes in favour of a plan would go as 100%. So this principle of 10% homebuyers or 100 is an extension of the same logic. We introduced this measure to facilitate the process, to prevent unnecessary delay and to do away with the clogging before the COC or the adjudicating authority”, submitted the ASG.”The joint-filing is an extension of the principle of the act of one binding all. The homebuyers at that stage had not objected and had in fact supported it. It was the developers who were opposing it as they didn’t want the resolution process to go smoothly”, she argued.”Joint-filing was inherent in section 7, even as it stood originally. Even then it read that a financial creditor, either by itself or jointly with the other financial creditors, may file an application for the initiation of the resolution process. Now it has just been made mandatory”, she explained.”By virtue of a notification dated 27.2.2019, even a Guardian, executor or trustee can file such an application. In case of debenture holders, there may be a representative, a debenture trustee, at the first instance also. In case of home buyers, you can’t have a trustee at the outset itself- 10% or 100 are needed- though you may appoint an authorised representative later”, she continued.”Joint filing is needed as this is an in-rem concept. A single person can file an application even on the basis of somebody else’s debt, even if it is not your own. That is why it is an in-rem concept…the 10% or the 100 can also file for a third party, say, a bank. So the concept of in-rem is sown deep…it is superficial to say that such in-rem concept can be brought in only at the stage of the COC and not at the initiation. The Legislature can enforce the 10% requirement at even the initiation, particularly when the process which is triggered is unstoppable. It may be for resolution but it may go out of the control of the individuals…so it is necessary to apply your mind and get at least some people on board for the sake of your own compatriots…we cannot allow a lone-ranger, on a frolic of his own, to set in motion an unstoppable process…where a single home buyer wants to move the NCLT, there may be a 100 others who want to go to RERA, they want that builder! So it is important to put your heads together a little bit, get at least the minimal number of people together in the interest of your brethren and then go ahead, as otherwise there is a moratorium…and 10% is not logistically difficult. It is important for balancing the interests of the small home-buyers and the debenture-holders”, she elaborated.Intelligible differentia linked to the larger object of the CodeNext, she expounded the characteristics of the classes for whom these conditions have been introduced- the intelligible differentia linked to the larger object the Code. “The numerosity- the sheer number of these persons; the heterogeneity; and the individual decisions…Pioneer also said that these home-buyers are not experts. We are guided by robust common sense, that these people either want their flat or compensation…but here, there is an individuality involved rather than institutional decision-making as in the case of banks. You are not in the domain of a public utility so the approach of the adjudicating authority is different”, she continued.Discussing the larger object of the Code, she narrated that prior to the introduction of the IBC, the framework for corporate bankruptcy and insolvency was inadequate and resulted in undue delays in resolution. So the IBC was introduced to consolidate and amend the laws to provide for a timb-bound procedure which maximises the value of assets and balances interests of stakeholders. with a view to promote entrepreneurship and investment, she submitted in the light of the Statements of Objects and Reasons and the Preamble.”So, one, there is a need to balance the interests of the stake-holders, the other debenture-holders, the home-buyers, the banks and financial institutions, and the other operational creditors, and two, maximise the value of assets…in Standard Chartered, your Lordships recognised that the passage of time is inversely proportional to the value of assets…the Sick Industries Act was a miserable failure because it allowed the promoters to continue in the management, the debtors to continue possessing the assets. The matter used to go on for years before the BIFR and there was absolutely nothing but dead wood that remained at the end…so time is absolutely of the essence in such proceedings, and hence, we needed a tight schedule and a concerted, solid plan for getting the company running or even in liquidation, to keep intact the value of assets. Even liquidation is not bad, at least the stake-holders get something”, submitted the ASG.”Your Lordships had ruled that 51% is 100, as you noted that creditors tend to haggle, some may not even show up, and hence, a lot of time would otherwise go. Similarly here, there may be 100 people who want to go to the NCLT, and when the first is admitted, the rest are taken care of. But for that one to be admitted, the 100 need to be listed time and again- there are replies, rejoinders, there may be adjournments. Your Lordships had even said that the 14 day period in section 7 is directory and not mandatory…even for a matter against one company, you are choking up the docket not only for that company but also for the others as the same NCLT is to also decide the other matters…for the small home-buyers, it is better and cost-effective to have their matter so coordinated. Also, the corporate debtor is being dragged in because of a default- if they had to defend 100 proceedings, file 100 replies, with the money-clock ticking, the corporate debtor would bleed further. So it is also in his interest to have one consolidated petition rather than 100 different”, explained the ASG.She assured the bench that the government is also working towards augmenting the infrastructure at the NCLTs and the NCLAT- “the number of members have been increased. I have the numbers and will file the affidavit in the Pioneer matter pending before Your Lordships. We are working on that front too…but we are trying to declutter the process, considering the number and the types of claims involved””What if the claims are not all the same? What if, out of 100, 50 are barred by limitation?”, asked Justice Nariman.”All the 100 don’t need to show default in each case. It need not even be their own claim, they may even come for someone else. Just one case of default is needed, which is genuine and not time-barred…even the threshold of one crore was introduced so that companies are not destabilised for no fault of their own amidst the pandemic”, replied Ms. Diwan.”Part III of the code deals with individuals and firms without limited liability…In Part III, if a creditor in the shoes of a home-buyer files such an application against a real-estate firm, he doesn’t need 100 persons..there are no such restrictions in Part III for individuals and firms without limited liability”, asked Justice K. M. Joseph.”That portion has not been brought into force yet”, responded Ms. Diwan.”Even then, there was no constitutional embargo on making the law?”, pressed Justice Joseph.”Real estate companies have multiple projects. If one is only a proprietor, he won’t be destabilising so many project.s The threshold requirement has been introduced so that the other home-buyers, creditors are not hurt and there is an application of mind by the critical mass of people in going ahead…the corporate debtor in such cases is a larger set-up than a proprietor or a firm”, replied Ms. Diwan.She continued to submit that after the 2019 Ordinance, there was a lull of 130 cases, while prior to November, 2019, there were more than 2200 cases. “So the huge spurt in cases has been controlled by this amendment. It is important for the economy and for the working of the code that small investors feel confident in the market. For doing business, we can’t have the NCLT choked up with cases and matters stuck before the COC”, she advanced.”What percentage of the GDP is spent on the judiciary?”, asked Justice Nariman.When Ms. Diwan replied that she is not aware, Justice Nariman told her that is less than 0.5%. “I cannot go into that. But as far as the NCLTs are concerned, there are 42 members now and several benches across India, even in smaller places…the NCLAT have also been augmented”, she replied.”The claims of all for justice must overwhelm your claims that you are stressed for funds. You have to find the funds. The needs of the home-buyers have to be met”, noted Justice Nariman.”But this regime is also cost-effective for the home-buyers and the corporate debtor. 10% is very proportionate, it is only a foot in the door”, argued Ms. Diwan.INFORMATION SYMMETRY OF RERAThe ASG drew the bench’s attention to certain provisions of the RERA Act- section 4(1) requiring every promoter to make an application for registration of a real estate project; section 5(1) on the grant of registration; section 5(1)(a) requiring the creation of web-page and section 11 enumerating the information to be displayed on the website- the list, number and the type of apartments/plots booked (“This is to determine whether the requirement of 100 or 10% is met. You will immediately get to know”, explained the ASG)She took the bench through section 11(3)(e) which places a mandate on the builder to enable the formation of an association/cooperative society of the allottees; section 19(9) on the rights and duties of the allottees, where a similar obligation is placed on them for the formation of an association.”So the identity of the allottees is also known, for one wanting to move the NCLT to be able to approach them”, added the ASG.”In practicality, this doesn’t work. No association is formed till the allotment is made, till the builder hands the flat to them”, observed Justice Sinha.”This is a new regime which places an obligation on the allottee to cooperate in the formation of an association. Even before, the associations were working informally”, replied the ASG.”Where do you get the exact details of the allotment and the allottees?”, asked Justice Nariman.”Section 11(1)(b) (of the RERA Act) speaks of quarterly up-to-date list of number and types of apartments or plots booked. 11(1)(b) gives you the number so you can calculate 10% or 100…the moment you become an allottee, it is your obligation to cooperate and form an association. The builder is also mandated to help in the formation”, she replied.”But there are so many overseas people, people from all over the globe. If a person in India needs to file an application, how does he get the contact of persons whose identity he doesn’t know?”, asked Justice Nariman.”One, you need to know the number of persons on board, as this is not a representative proceeding in the nature of Order 1 Rule 8 of the CPC. And two, you need to procure the contact details of these people. You can go to the association which always has a directory of the concerned persons. Even if the people are abroad, you can get in touch through WhatsApp chats. The builder has to help form the association, otherwise there are strict liabilities on him”, responded the SG.”WhatsApp chats are so dangerous…only if you are a judge, not an allottee”, remarked Justice Nariman in a lighter vein.Then, Justice Nariman indicated section 7 of the RERA Act, on revocation of registration for default on the part of the builder, and section 8(1) providing that Upon lapse of the registration or on revocation of the registration, the RERA Authority, may consult the appropriate Government to take such action as it may deem fit including the carrying out of the remaining development works by competent authority or by the association of allottees or in any other manner. “How far, how frequently, how effectively are these being used? Is the same object as under the IBC being achieved under the RERA?”, he asked.”The authorities are set up by the states and the states have to file affidavits on how far the Act is being implemented. Now, it is on an All India basis and there are stringent penalties”, replied the ASG.”Does section 8(1) extend to the actual construction of the structure if it’s incomplete? The terminology appears to be very wide”, asked Justice Nariman.”The Act was meant to be a deterrent to the builders, to demand liability, transparency and accountability from them, to instill fear in them and to demand they pull up their socks, otherwise money was being funnelled all over the place”, responded the ASG.Next, Justice Nariman indicated the Explanation appended to sections 14 and 15 of the Act- “the allottees, irrespective of the number of apartments or plots, as the case may be, booked by him or booked in the name of his family, or in the case of other persons such as companies or firms or any association of individuals, etc., by whatever name called, booked in its name or booked in the name of its associated entities or related enterprises, shall be considered as one allottee only.” “As regards joint-holdings, the allottees are deemed as one, but only for the purpose of sections 14 and 15. So if a man with his family members satisfies the requirement of 10%, can they file an application under the IBC?”, asked Justice Nariman.”If there are joint-owners, then common sense dictates that they would be deemed to be one allottee as the allotment is qua one apartment…but let the NCLT decide this when a case comes up”, replied the ASG.”Since when has common sense been the law? We’ve had common law, not common sense”, remarked Justice Nariman in good humour.CLASS ACTIONSMs. Diwan drew the bench’s attention to the 1952 Bhabha committee report on Company Law. As regards Minority interests and the Court’s powers in case of oppression by majority or gross mismanagement, she pointed out that the committee recommended a departure from the regular provision of the English Act: that the power to present petitions to the Court, which is given to a single shareholder under section 210 of the English Act, should, in the circumstances of this country, be given to a specified number or percentage of shareholders, ordinarily not less than fifty in number or those holding not less than one-tenth of the issued share capital of a company on which calls and other sums due have been paid or not less than one-fifth in number of members in case of companies not having a share capital. These provisions were considered necessary to discourage the presentation of frivolous petitions by one or more disgruntled shareholders The difference between the prescribed members competent to commence proceedings under the proposed sections was deemed to be justified by the nature of the relief provided.”Minority action is an exception to corporate democracy. To prevent frivolous petitions at the instance of a lone-ranger, we have the threshold, which can be waived. But in our case, the consequences are much more unstoppable.The genie can’t be put back into the bottle, unless the petition is withdrawn and settled.”, explained the ASG.”We are not saying that the financial creditors can’t file an application and take the company through the insolvency resolution process but they must be mindful of the interests of their own compatriots…here it is not just about frivolous litigation, but multiplicity of litigation, pressure on infrastructure, added costs on the corporate debtor. What you do impacts others so there must be a check at the initiation stage itself”, she said.”The developers, in Pioneer, argued that if you allow one home-buyer to approach the NCLT, it will lead to a flood of litigation. Your Lordships said that one is not arbitrary. So, since single-person filing is not arbitrary, 10% or 100 cannot be said to be manifestly arbitrary!”, she argued.The bench asked if other than the Companies Act, there are similar provisions in any other statutes.”The Consumer Protection Act…In Pioneer also it was argued that if home-buyers are recognised as financial creditors, a condition of 25% be imposed for approaching the NCLT…we were privy to all arguments and considered 10% to be perfectly reasonable”, continued the ASG.She indicated the findings of the committee report in this context- “undue pressure on the corporate debtor…potential to jeopardise interests of the class not in favour of moving the NCLT…pressure on the adjudicating authority to hear the objections…antithetical to the value of a time-bound procedure””Suppose there are 100 allotments, then 10% comes to 10. The threshold is 1 crore. Now, if 2 have an agreement of 2020, and the others are of 2021, then? What if the dates of agreements are different? Is it sufficient if 2 or 3 comply with the requirement of 1 crore but not the others because the default in their case is to be in the future?, asked Justice Nariman.”There has to be just one default and it has to be of 1 crore. It is not even necessary that it should in the case of the applicants. Only numerical strength is needed. For the monetary threshold, it may be of somebody else also. That is the beauty of section 7″, explained the ASG.”To achieve the numerical strength, someone who is not immediately prejudiced because the default is to happen in the future can also be included?’, asked Justice Nariman.”Section 7 says that a default includes a default in respect of a financial debt owed not only to the applicant financial creditor but to any other financial creditor of the corporate debtor…I just need to show that I am not a busy body but financial creditor of the company…of course, it will be harder to prove default in case of a third party…I may be a home-buyer, but if there is a bank from which a loan taken by the corporate debtor has now been defaulted, I can maintain my petition. I just need the numbers”, replied the ASG.”You say they (the applicants) can come back after mustering the requisite number? What about limitation then?”, asked Justice Nariman.Ms. Diwan replied that as of now there is a stay by the Supreme Court on account of the pandemic situation, so the provisions operate in the applicants’ favour and the period is excluded. But section 14 of the Limitation Act would apply to them, she added.”The IBC has had fantastic results in enhancing the ease of doing business. We are also learning and becoming wiser with the process, Your Lordships have also pushed this process…Your Lordships said the petitioner must come with a clean slate. It is new person who is coming into the company in distress…for the code to work, he must know what he is getting into..it can’t be a shot into the darkness…the property must remain within the company for the stakeholders…there are already banks, financial institutions and other creditors…if there is clambering criminal liability, sprouting like hydrae heads all over the place, there will not be many takers…” she concludedRead the report of first day’s hearing hereSubscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Story
Ronald Smith from Aliquippa(PITTSBURGH) — A camel ended up getting loose and running wild at a circus in Pittsburgh on Sunday, dragging one rider on a harrowing experience and injuring six children.The six children suffered minor injuries, though one broke their arm, officials said. An adult also suffered a minor injury in the incident.The camel was apparently spooked during a mid-show event by the Shrine Circus at PPG Paints Arena in which guests are invited down to the floor to see the circus animals up close and even ride some of them, including camels, according to Pittsburgh ABC affiliate WTAE.“We’ve had the circus for 69 years without incident,” Shrine Circus Chairman Paul Leavy told WTAE. “Unfortunately this is the first one and we are ready to handle things like this, we are insured for this, so we’ll get back together and see what we’re going to do next year.”The rides continued after the camel was corralled and the second half of the circus went on as planned.“I was like, ‘This happens everywhere else, not here,’” eyewitness Michelle Cioppa said. “It was like it was not even real. It was just the craziest thing.”Video shot by an attendee showed the camel bucking as it traversed the crowded arena floor with a rider clinging to its back and two handlers chasing after it. It’s unclear if the rider was one of those injured in the incident.People on the floor can be seen scrambling to avoid the animal before handlers brought it under control after about 10 seconds.An announcer in the arena can be heard saying, “Ladies and gentleman remain calm,” as parents hurriedly ushered children from the floor.“Praying for the little girls at the circus and the mother that was traumatizing,” Ronald Smith, who shot the video, wrote on Facebook. “My first and last time going to a circus.” Copyright © 2018, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.
UK employers fear being sued by employeesOn 1 Jan 2003 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article More than 80 per cent of UK employers feel vulnerable to being sued byworkers who have suffered workplace stress, discrimination or bullying. According to a study of 5,000 UK employers by Work Stress Management, only18 per cent feel they are not at risk at all. A total of 64 per cent of those polled believe the threat of being sued as aresult of workplace stress is “a very important issue” for theirbusiness, with 28 per cent describing it as “fairly important”. The survey also reported that last year saw a twelve-fold increase in thenumber of firms forced to pay damages for workplace stress, with 6,428 of thempaying an average of £51,000. www.workstressmanagement.com Comments are closed. Related posts:No related photos.