WINDING-UP PETITION

Hawera Star, Volume LIV, 29 May 1935, Page 5

WINDING-UP PETITION

ACTION IN SUPREME dbURT

LIQUIDATOR OPPOSED

(By Telegraph—Press Association.) AUCKLAND, May 2S.

The affairs of the organisation known as International Concessions Ltd. were reviewed before Mr Justice Fair in the Supreme Court when a petition for winding up of fhe company by the court under the Companies Act, 1933, ' was presented. It was asked in the j alternative that the voluntary windI ing-tip of International Concessions ! Ltd. might be continued subject to the j supervision of the court, j The petitioners, Messrs G. A. Hart I (Wellington, civil engineer), A. A. ! Church (Wellington, clerk) and S. W. jR. Powell (Wellington, surgeon j dentist) and Mrs Olive Myrtle Zucker i (Wellington), and certain supporting shareholders, were represented by Mr Haigh. Mr Henry appeared for 22' ! New Plymouth shareholders in the, company and Mr Richmond opposed the petition on behalf of the present liquidator, Mr A. L. Stcdman, and on behalf of live objecting shareholders. Mr Singer represented the remaining objecting shareholders to the number of 100 with holdings valued at £10,942. The petition 1 stated, that. 1 International Concessions Ltd. was incorporated in September, 1932, with a registered oflice at Auckland and a nominal capital of £50,000. The amount of capital paid up, or credited as paid up, was £23,951 10s. The actual object of the company, petitioners stated, was to acquire foreign concessions in order to conduct lotteries in foreign countries where such lotteries would be legal. Of the shares 5000 were to be allotted fully-paid to the promoter, 15,000 held in reserve, and 30,000 offered for public subscription. , The Royal Commission of Inquiry into company promotion methods recommended last October “that no company incorporated in New Zealand shall be permitted to raise money in New Zealand or elsewhere for the pursuance in another country of any object which is unlawful in New Zealand and any existing company having any such object may bo wound up. by tho court oh application of the Attorney* General.”

, WINDING-UP DECISION. As a result the directors convened a meeting of shareholders which passed a resolution winding up the company voluntarily. At a meeting of over 100 shareholders at Wellington ( on February 27, Mr J. N. Wilson, Auckland, solicitor for the liquidators, informed the meeting that the liquidators had agreed to sell the company’s only concession, which the shareholders wore then informed was in the Free City of Danzig, lo an Australian company witln a proposed capital of £IOO,OOO for £SO cash and an allotment to fullv-paid shareholders in the company of shares in the Australian company of tho nominal value equivalent to their shares in tho company. That meeting by a majority of 47 to 45 passed a resolution in favour of winding up the company under the supervision of the court and refusing to pay calls until tho legality of the company had been tested in the court. In answering; an affidavit in support of the claim that the winding-up of the company by or under the supervision of the court, would not be in the best interests’of its shareholders, W. T. F. j Kells iMaso>-, broker, who was formerly | one of the liquidators and a director of j

International Concessions Ltd., said the directors sought to obtain control of tho share capital of some overseas company or association holding a license from its State Government, to conduct lotteries and sweepstakes. In March, 1933, Ileury M.axwell was engaged to proceed to London to secure if possible a controlling interest in such a company. On November 17, 1934, lie aequirrd practically the whole of the shares in a company registered in the Free City of Danzig. In June, 1933, directors of International Concessions Ltd. decided to invest £IOOO of the company ’s capital in Group Insurance Brck?7s Ltd. This company met with initial success, but the conviction of the- manager of the

Multiple System Ltd., a business having some points of resemblance to the business of Group Insurance Brokers Ltd., rendered it impossible through adverse publicity for the latter company to conduct operations. It was stated it was never the intention of International Concessions Ltd. to sell or to be concerned m the sale of tickets in a lottery. ITT TTaigh submit too there would be assets available for distribution.

INTERNATIONAL CONCESSIONS