“One-man” Companies.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XLV, Issue 18, 2 November 1910, Page 3

“One-man” Companies.

‘One man” companies—the Fruil .ol a recent British Act of Parliament, facilitating the formation of limited liability companies, are providing English courts of law with some amusing cases, (hie extracts the following from the Birmingham “Daily Mail”: Judge Ruegg, of the Birmingham County Court, has, we read, had a situation explained to him to which justice could only be done by a Gilbert. It arose out of an interpleader action. Some time before a man contract cd debts he could not pay. At a time when creditors were pressing him for payment, lie decided to convert a small manufacturing business he conducted into a limited liability company, with a capital of £1.001). He therefore sought out a man to whom, said counsel, no one went unless he was in extremis, and floated the company, transferring to it every asset he had except some book debts. He retained the liabilities. He included in the transfer, according to his own statement, the houseful of fur-ii tore he had a mile away from his works. He received for this consideration 500 .£ 1 shares in the company, his wife and he became directors, and several of his children wore given shares. He declared that the directors' meetings, his wife and he attending, took place at his home — the nouse being in his own name and not of the company—and the proceedings were duly entered up in the minute book. By and by a creditor obtained judgment against the man, and in satisfaction of the laim seized a handsome suite which was in the company’s house and in use by the directors and shareholders of the company. Thereupon tin* company brought an interpleader action to recover the furniture, which they said had been improperly seized. His Honor found the ease proved, and the creditor has had the chagrin of returning the suite to the house of the company, to used by iiis creditor in lii< capacity of director.