USE OF THE WORD "LIMITED"

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3020, 6 March 1917, Page 3

USE OF THE WORD "LIMITED"

INTERESTING POINT .RAISED. At yesterday's meeting of tho AVellington Chamber of Commerce a letter was received from Mr. Charles M. Brown, of the firm of TV. M. Bannatyne aud Co., Ltd., dealing with a matter that will interest business people. Air. Brown wrote: — "Dear sir,—Two or three cases have recently come under my notice 'whoro a sole trader or a Urm is carrying on business with the word 'Limited' as part of tho trade name, and so far ae 1 can sec from examinatita of the Companies' Act there is no section precluding euch a course. Also the liegistrar of Companies has no standing in such a case, as he is empowered only to deal with incorporated companies. You will agree that this is a most extraordinary and undesirable position, and I would respectfully suggost that the necessary amendment of tho Companies Act be strongly urged by your chamber." The secretary (Mr. Vickery) reported "that so far as he could ascertain there was no provision in the New Zealand Companies Act by which a firm was prohibited from -using the word 'Limited' as part of a trade name, even though it be not a registered company under tho Act. Under Section 282 of the English Act, 1908, tho uae of the word 'Limited' as the last word of a firm's or company's name was prohibited, unless it is a company registered under the Companies Act." ■' In law the firm, though it used the word "Limited" when it was not so constituted, would be held to its liabilities. The fact that it used the word in connection with the name of the firm carried no force legally. Mr. D. Ewen thought that the use of the word might be misleading te people huying shares. They might be misled into thinking that _ the firm whose shares they were buying was a limited concern. On the motion of Mr. Thomas Ballinger, it was decided to refer the matter to, the Associated Chambers of | Commerce. . i