hi thanks for video lecture find it very interesting.
you had an example where company T can lend to Miss U. Also company U can lend to Mr T but the law states that only one of these things can happen, it is illegal for both of these things to take place.
To get round this law cant they get a third company ‘company Y’. So company T lends to miss U but now company U lends to Mr Y and company Y lends to Mr T?
i wish i could steal your brain just for the 10th june 馃榾 Mr. Hike , I am finding it hard to grasp the names of the cases. Majorly because I am really bad at remembering names
Hi Mike,
So as long as a public company is not related to any of the private companies, the restrictions does not apply to connected personnel, am I right?
Also in this lecture, the term director is used to refer to a director of a private or public company? Or both?
Thank you very much for the lectures!
hi thanks for video lecture find it very interesting.
you had an example where company T can lend to Miss U. Also company U can lend to Mr T but the law states that only one of these things can happen, it is illegal for both of these things to take place.
To get round this law cant they get a third company ‘company Y’. So company T lends to miss U but now company U lends to Mr Y and company Y lends to Mr T?
No, because that would simply be described by the Courts (should they find out) as a scam – not a scheme – it’s a scam or sham.
Paul, may I suggest that, instead of trying to find ways of bending the rules, you concentrate on how the rules are intended to apply.
When you’re qualified, that’s the time to see what loopholes you could exploit
i wish i could steal your brain just for the 10th june 馃榾 Mr. Hike , I am finding it hard to grasp the names of the cases. Majorly because I am really bad at remembering names
Top lecture..thanks Mike
Bundle of thnx