TATA v MISTRY [Day 6]

Hearing to resume before Supreme Court in a short while from now.

@tatatrusts
@TataCompanies

#SupremeCourt

TATA v MISTRY

Senior counsel Shyam Divan begins arguments on behalf of Shapoorji Pallonji group.

@tatatrusts @TataCompanies
TATA v MISTRY

This case is about corporate governance. We have moved from corporate democracy to a much richer corporate governance under the amended Companies Act: Divan

@tatatrusts
TATA v MISTRY

The management of company is the board. The most crucial obligation imposed on Director now is that the director is a fiduciary. A fiduciary's allegiance is to the company alone: Divan

#SupremeCourt #tatasons
TATA v MISTRY

Lack of probity is much broader than financial irregularities.

The long relationship between the two groups developed over decades. It developed in the context of a statutory framework which restricted the role of private trust: Divan.
TATA v MISTRY

There was a beach of articles in the removal of Cyrus Mistry: Divan

#tatasons #tatamistry
TATA v MISTRY

Management has to be by the board as per the articles and the statute.

Termination of managing director has to be by a resolution. The same process as is followed for appointment has to be followed: Divan
TATA v MISTRY

Section 166 is very very important. It lays down duties of Directors.

If you are torn between allegiance to company and allegiance to something else, then you cannot act as a Director: Divan.
TATA v MISTRY

Director cannot abdicate or yield on his/her independent judgment. Director may consult or take advice but has to act independently and cannot be compelled or coerced: Divan
TATA v MISTRY

Two directors had praised Mistry for his performance as Executive Chairperson four months before his removal. Those two directors did not even file their response explaining their conduct: Divan.

#tatavmisrty #tata #mistry
TATA v MISTRY

Supreme Court says it is intending to make certain observations on the procedure to be followed by tribunals. This was in the context of whether plea before NCLAT should have been amended by way of amendment applications or additional affidavits.

@tatatrusts
TATA v MISTRY

The selection of Tata Sons chairperson is crucial. It affects so many companies and stakeholders across countries and continents: Divan

#SupremeCourt #tatasons #mistry
TATA v MISTRY

Ratan Tata is not subject to the discipline under Section 166 of the Companies Act. He ceased of be board member in December 2012 and did not attended a single board meeting till October 2016: Divan
TATA v MISTRY

Shyam Divan reading case laws on corporate governance and fiduciary duties of Director stating how the Companies Act moved from corporate majority to corporate governance.
TATA v MISTRY

Divan says TATA Trusts could not vote on its own shares between 1964 and 2000 due to statutory restrictions and it was a public trustee appointed by Central government who could vote on your shares: Divan
TATA v MISTRY

That was when Shapoorji Pallonji because of their relationship with Tata became a reliable partner who could vote and that is why Tata sold their shares to SPG. This continued till public trustee mandate was done away with in 2000 and Tata Trusts could vote : Divan
TATA v MISTRY

Divan giving history of Shapoorji Pallonji group's relationship with TATA group and how various SP group persons served on board of various Tata group companies.

The relationship is 5 decades old of which 4 was during public trustee regime: Divan

@TataCompanies
TATA v MISTRY

The relationship was of one utmost trust and good faith. The only thing we asked for was a place on the board which is recognised under Companies Act of 2013: Divan
TATA v MISTRY

Hence, the removal of Mistry was illegal, oppressive and against good faith and trust which Tata and Shapoorji Pallonji group shared: Divan

@tatatrusts
@TataCompanies

#SupremeCourt #tatasons
TATA v MISTRY

Bench rises for the day. Hearing to continue tomorrow.

#SupremeCourt #tatasons

@tatatrusts @TataCompanies @RNTata2000

More from Bar & Bench

More from Court

In the MATTER OF Jones David HOLLISTER
A171609.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
July 8, 2020.
https://t.co/qB3G8IAtxS we must correctly interpret the statute.
Stull v. Hoke, 326 Or. 72, 77, 948 P.2d 722 (1997).
legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary

Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and Mooney, Judge, and Hadlock, Judge pro tempore.

https://t.co/oJuecwvEKc


Bruce L. Campbell, John C. Clarke, and Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP filed the brief amicus curiae for Transgender Law Center, interACT, and Beyond Binary Legal.

Does ORS 33.460 permit the circuit court to grant a legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary? The circuit court concluded that the statute does not permit such a change, and it denied petitioner's application under ORS 33.460
so @tedwheeler did you hear? today we are discussing "public whippings" thanks to @JamesBuchal

its a great chance to study the history of public beatings.
understandably, women feel threatened. https://t.co/jck05JGM4B
#PDX #tourism


FIRST OREGON WIFE-BEATER TO RECEIVE WHIPPING POST PUNISHMENT
https://t.co/3SJOODbuLf
PORTLAND. Or., June 7—The whipping post law passed at the last session of the Legislature was Into execution for the first time today, the victim being Charles Mcdlnty, convicted of wlfe-beatlng

whip was a braided blacksnake, made of rawhide, with four lashes. ..hustled to jail, stripped to the

waist, manacled, and his hands tied to the door high above his head. The whipping was as severe as the powerful deputy was capable of administering. Blood drawn on the 4th blow.

You May Also Like

@franciscodeasis https://t.co/OuQaBRFPu7
Unfortunately the "This work includes the identification of viral sequences in bat samples, and has resulted in the isolation of three bat SARS-related coronaviruses that are now used as reagents to test therapeutics and vaccines." were BEFORE the


chimeric infectious clone grants were there.https://t.co/DAArwFkz6v is in 2017, Rs4231.
https://t.co/UgXygDjYbW is in 2016, RsSHC014 and RsWIV16.
https://t.co/krO69CsJ94 is in 2013, RsWIV1. notice that this is before the beginning of the project

starting in 2016. Also remember that they told about only 3 isolates/live viruses. RsSHC014 is a live infectious clone that is just as alive as those other "Isolates".

P.D. somehow is able to use funds that he have yet recieved yet, and send results and sequences from late 2019 back in time into 2015,2013 and 2016!

https://t.co/4wC7k1Lh54 Ref 3: Why ALL your pangolin samples were PCR negative? to avoid deep sequencing and accidentally reveal Paguma Larvata and Oryctolagus Cuniculus?