32 / 406
GAZ E T TE
J ANUARY / F EBRUARY 1985
15. [1915] 1 I.R. 345 at 378-379.
16. High Court, unreported, 23rd May 1974.
An Apprentice Proposes
I am sure you can Notice Emotion
As I Summons my courage to speak.
You can Judge for yourself my devotion,
In my Trials I must not be meek.
Goliath-like is my affection—
a mere Half-a-David am I.
My heart is aimed in your Direction
And Counsels me not to be shy.
Your Appearance, whenever you Enter
It leaves me without a Defence.
Oh please be my willing Consenter
Don't say that I've given Offence.
Oh may I Bespeak your Hand dear
I pray that you give your Reply.
Determine this Suit in my favour,
If you turn down my Pleadings, I'll die.
M. O'Sullivan
A comprehensive service to the
Legal Profession
ALLIED
- Secretarial
5 2 Ade l a i de Rd . ,
(Typing, copying and message handling)
Du b l i n 2
LEGAL
- Legal Agents
- Wo rd Processing
789712
829923
SERVICES
(Ideal for multiple Duplication)
- Translators/Interpreters
(Over 50 languages)
A
unique range of Services and
a cut above the Competition.
17. (1888) 40 Ch. D 135, Kenny J. also cited
Irvine -v- Union Bank of
Australia
(1877) 2 A.C. 366.
18. At page 10 of his unreported judgment.
19.
Ibid,
at p. 11.
20. For this reason Professor Gower says that the case is a strong one
Principles of Modern Company Law
(4th Edition, London 1979) at
183.
21.(1856) 6 E. and B. 327 at 332.
22. [1896] 2 Ch. 743.
23. S.I. No. 163 of 1973.
24. Council Directive of 9 March 1968, No. 68/151.
25. [1982] 3 All E.R. 551.
26. See generally Ussher (1975) 10 Irish Jurist 39.
27. Clause 3 of S.I. No. 163 of 1973.
28. [1982] 3 All E.R. 551.
29. See clauses 4(1X0 and 6(3) of S.I. No. 163 of 1973.
30. See the observations of Lord Hatherley in
Mahony
-v-
East Holy ford
Mining Co.
[1875] L.R. 7 H.L. 869 at 893.
31. See also as protective provisions section 178 of the Companies Act
1963 and Table A, article 108. The effect of these provisions is to
validate the acts of a director or manager who has not been validly
appointed because there was some slip or irregularity in his appoint-
ment or qualification. The provisions do not validate acts where
there has been no appointment at all:
Morris-v-Kanssen
[1946]
A.C.
459. Nor do they validate acts which could not have been done even
by a properly qualified director:
Craven-Ellis
-v-
Canons Ltd.
[1936] 2
K.B. 403.
21