Tucon process installations

Advanced A. Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world. Subscribers are able to see a list of all the cited cases and legislation of a document. Subscribers are able to see a list of all the documents that have cited the case. Subscribers are able to see the revised versions of legislation with amendments.

Subscribers are able to see any amendments made to the case. Subscribers are able to see a visualisation of a case and its relationships to other cases. An alternative to lists of cases, the Precedent Map makes it easier to establish which ones may be of most relevance to your research and prioritise further reading.

You also get a useful overview of how the case was received. Subscribers are able to see the list of results connected to your document through the topics and citations Vincent found. VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy.

Your World of Legal Intelligence. Ryan P. Peart J. Costello J. Costello J held that the appeal should be dismissed. Appeal dismissed. Justice Costello delivered on 13th July, The relevant statutory provisions. This provides:-? To continue reading. You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.

Request your trial. The company's current directors have been the director of 1 other Irish company between them.

According to our records, Tucon Process Installations Limited has had a judgment registered against it. Tucon Process Installations Limited has 1 shareholder. Generate a B2B Marketing List with ease and grow your business. Identify key decision makers and pre-qualified new prospects for your sales and business development teams. Similar Companies - Create a marketing list of similar companies.

Vision-net Credit Scores save your business the time and cost of chasing slow payers. Evaluate risk at client application stage or run continuous credit checks on your full customer base. The application was heard on the 20 th and 21 st of January and 10 February Ronnie Hudson appeared for the applicant. Elizabeth Donovan. The first issue to be determined is the capacity of the company to bring this application. The specific sections of the Act invoked by the heading of the Notice of Motion are sections and Each of these sections specifically refers to " Before deciding the issue, it must be noted that the applicant specifically declined a proposal by the respondent during the proceedings that the company should be substituted by the liquidator for the purposes of determining the merits of the application made herein.

In the case of an application brought pursuant to a statutory provision, regard must be had to the plain and ordinary meaning of the words of the statute in determining questions such as standing.

The nomination of specific parties as potential applicants expressly precludes such statutory applications being brought by a party other than those specified by the legislature, otherwise the precise words used to legislate for classes of applicant would be deprived of ordinary meaning.

As the company is not specified by either statutory provision as being an appropriate applicant, it has no standing to seek relief under either of the statutory provisions invoked in this application.

This interpretation of the sections in question also has the benefit of being in keeping with the general principle that in company law matters, where proceedings are being taken for the benefit of the company, rather than by an individual creditor or contributory, the liquidator should be named as the applicant rather than the company itself.

In those circumstances, the liquidator will be entitled to an indemnity out of the assets in the winding up, unless he has acted improperly. A somewhat similar situation arose on the facts of the case of Southern Mineral Oil Ltd.

Cooney [] 3 I. In that case, proceedings under s. Lynch J. They provide that the application shall be brought by the receiver or examiner or a liquidator, as the case may be, and in all cases the application may also be brought by any creditor or contributory of the company in question. Nor do the provisions of 0. The Revenue Commissioners are the real applicants in the proceedings brought against the respondents In these circumstances it seems to me that it is wrong that they should be enabled to shelter against liability for the respondents' costs if the respondents succeed in the substantive trial of the motion by bringing the proceedings in the name of two companies who have no assets.

On my reading of ss. Keane J. Barron J. Subscribers can access the reported version of this case.