Bench headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde assembles.
Hearing commences.
@tatatrusts @TataCompanies
TATA v MISTRY
Hearing to resume today in Supreme Court. Senior Advocate CA Sundaram to continue arguments on behalf of Shapoorji Pallonji firms.
Follow this thread for live updates from court.
@tatatrusts @TataCompanies
#SupremeCourt #tatamistry
Bench headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde assembles.
Hearing commences.
@tatatrusts @TataCompanies
CJI SA Bobde announces that over the weekend he discovered his son who is practicing in Mumbai has been appearing for the last 2 years in a slum rehabilitation matter for a subsidiary company of Shapoorji Pallonji group.
@tatatrusts
CJI asks whether Harish Salve, Dr Singhvi or CA Sundaram has any objections to CJI hearing the matter.
None of them object. The same is recorded by the Court.
Hearing continues.
#SupremeCourt
CJI says such issues could cause potential problems in future.
Sundaram continues with his arguments.
@tatatrusts @TataCompanies
Sundaram citing Articles of Tata Sons to show the supremacy of the Board.
Article 121A was introduced to ensure that certain matters had to necessarily have Board approval.
#SupremeCourt #TataSons
SP group also voted in favour of A 121 due to the relationship of trust they had with Tata Sons.
SP group could not have conceived that the article would be used against them: Sundaram.
#tatasons #SupremeCourt
Discussion on interest that Ratan Tata had in Ola/ Uber
Sundaram says he had a personal interest in Ola
CJI Bobde: Does it mean he had business interest
Dr. Singhvi says he wanted to have Tata cars used in Ola and Uber and not just Ola as suggested by Mistry
CJI Bobde: Mr. Sundaram, you must bear in mind that this is a private company. Our experience with such companies is that they have heads of families controlling, giving directions etc. Birlas, Tata all have such structures.
Your SP Group might also have it.
CJI Bobde: What is wrong in head of family wanting information or wanting to control decisions.
@tatatrusts
@TataCompanies
Sundaram: This company owns many listed companies running to 65 lakh crores with public shareholders. So there should be some kind of independence in decision making.
If they wanted to keep a family affair, they should have remained so instead of making it public
A public charitable trust cannot legally run such companies. That is why it needs it be "board run": CA Sundaram.
@tatatrusts @TataCompanies
#SupremeCourt
They cannot use the Articles to claim that they have absolute right over affairs of the company: CA Sundaram
Bench rises. Hearing to continue tomorrow.
@tatatrusts
#TataSons #SupremeCourt
#TataSons @tatatrusts @TataCompanies @RNTata2000
#cyrusmistry
https://t.co/gMD5CxzO66
More from Bar & Bench
More from Law
We are live tweeting from the preliminary hearing of the Employment Tribunal case in which #AllisonBailey is suing Stonewall and Garden Court chambers.
The judge has ruled that for this hearing only, the names should remain redacted.
It is a Rule 50 Order. These particular individuals are members of Stonewall’s Trans Advisory Group and their names may well be known elsewhere. What is relevant is the messages from the group to Garden Court.
The judge states she would not make the same decision at the full hearing. This is only for the preliminary hearing.
Having dealt with the anonymity issue we now move to the main submissions in the case.
The entire first part of the hearing related to messages sent by certain individuals from the Stonewall Trans Advisory Group seeking cooperation with trans allies at Garden Court. So far all the discussion has been about whether their names must remain redacted.
— LGB Alliance (@ALLIANCELGB) February 11, 2021
The judge has ruled that for this hearing only, the names should remain redacted.
It is a Rule 50 Order. These particular individuals are members of Stonewall’s Trans Advisory Group and their names may well be known elsewhere. What is relevant is the messages from the group to Garden Court.
The judge states she would not make the same decision at the full hearing. This is only for the preliminary hearing.
Having dealt with the anonymity issue we now move to the main submissions in the case.
A Call for Help!
1. we have a petition/open letter for the WHO
https://t.co/Bie8pUy7WJ
2. 372 people signed it but we want to boost it
3. I post link ascomment on related YT videos
Tks @KevinMcH3 for the tip
4. You can help by liking the comments
5. That will increase visibility!
6. Links for YT videos with comments are here
1. China curtails hunt for virus origins
https://t.co/NhcYdtsd2Y
2. China: nearly 500,000 may have been infected in Wuhan
https://t.co/KRUQ5hFrii
3. WHO becomes US-China battleground | DW Documentary
https://t.co/8ah8M8bpiB
4. Gravitas: The 'hidden hunt' for COVID-19 origins
https://t.co/hHhhUqgPYt
5. Seeking the invisible: hunt for origins of deadly Covid-19 coronavirus will take scientists to Wuhan
https://t.co/tCPQqjUZF3
6. WHO team to probe COVID-19 origins in
7. How forensic researchers track down origins of SARS-CoV2
https://t.co/r7A1lkr5li
8. Bats, roadblocks & the origins of coronavirus - BBC
https://t.co/Kh9jacC54t
9. New coronavirus strain is far more infectious and spreading among young - BBC
10. https://t.co/OcpAZ9nrl3
11. https://t.co/OcpAZ9nrl3
12. https://t.co/OcpAZ9nrl3
13. https://t.co/PhmoSfvbD8
14. https://t.co/TsvB7SYN2c
15. https://t.co/0o5YbmiUbJ
16. https://t.co/ir7QiwmlWt
17. https://t.co/PTT3KZDi8F
18.
1. we have a petition/open letter for the WHO
https://t.co/Bie8pUy7WJ
2. 372 people signed it but we want to boost it
3. I post link ascomment on related YT videos
Tks @KevinMcH3 for the tip
4. You can help by liking the comments
5. That will increase visibility!
6. Links for YT videos with comments are here
1. China curtails hunt for virus origins
https://t.co/NhcYdtsd2Y
2. China: nearly 500,000 may have been infected in Wuhan
https://t.co/KRUQ5hFrii
3. WHO becomes US-China battleground | DW Documentary
https://t.co/8ah8M8bpiB
4. Gravitas: The 'hidden hunt' for COVID-19 origins
https://t.co/hHhhUqgPYt
5. Seeking the invisible: hunt for origins of deadly Covid-19 coronavirus will take scientists to Wuhan
https://t.co/tCPQqjUZF3
6. WHO team to probe COVID-19 origins in
7. How forensic researchers track down origins of SARS-CoV2
https://t.co/r7A1lkr5li
8. Bats, roadblocks & the origins of coronavirus - BBC
https://t.co/Kh9jacC54t
9. New coronavirus strain is far more infectious and spreading among young - BBC
10. https://t.co/OcpAZ9nrl3
11. https://t.co/OcpAZ9nrl3
12. https://t.co/OcpAZ9nrl3
13. https://t.co/PhmoSfvbD8
14. https://t.co/TsvB7SYN2c
15. https://t.co/0o5YbmiUbJ
16. https://t.co/ir7QiwmlWt
17. https://t.co/PTT3KZDi8F
18.
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
