Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Investment Company Act of 1940 (commonly referred to as the '40 Act) is an act of Congress which regulates investment funds. It was passed as a United States Public Law ( Pub. L. 76–768 ) on August 22, 1940, and is codified at 15 U.S.C. §§ 80a-1 – 80a-64 .
In arriving at the decisions to order the plaintiff to change her business name and to dismiss her appeal against that order, the Registrar and the Minister had respectively taken into account an irrelevant consideration. Ultimately, the court made an order of certiorari (now known as a quashing order) to quash both decisions. [14]
Singapore Exchange Securities Trading Ltd. (2012), [79] the High Court identified various factors to determine if the decision by Singapore Exchange Securities Trading Ltd. ("SGX-ST") to reprimand a director of a company listed on the Singapore Exchange was properly characterized as a public function. These factors include the extent to which ...
Alfred Jaretzki Jr. (1892–1976) was an American lawyer and an expert on investment companies. Jaretzki helped draft the Investment Company Act of 1940 passed by the United States Congress. He later authored an article in a 1941 issue of Washington University Law Quarterly that details the elements of the law and reasons for its passage. [1]
In the case, the applicant, who was a company director, challenged an order of the Industrial Arbitration Court ("IAC") which had made him personally liable for paying the retrenchment benefits of the company's employees. [50] The High Court quashed the order, holding that it was patently illegal as it was not authorised by law.
Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Act 2015; Bankruptcy (Amendment) Act 2015; Bus Services Industry Act 2015; Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (Amendment) Act 2015; Community Disputes Resolution Act 2015; Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 2015; Deep Seabed Mining Act 2015; Employment (Amendment) Act 2015
Rules are generally legal instruments such as Rules of Court that regulate judicial or other procedure. [45] Regulations are legal instruments implementing the substantive content of Acts of Parliament that have a continuing regulating effect. [46] An order is a legal instrument that has an executive flavour and expresses an obvious command ...
The two-stage procedure under O. 53 of the Rules of Court. The procedure for bringing applications for prerogative orders is set out in Order 53 of the Rules of Court ("O. 53"). [5] It is a two-stage process. At the first stage, the applicant must request the High Court for leave to apply for one or more prerogative orders.