He would know if he was in26 Nov 2015 18:21
The meeting if it was a show of hands. It would be obvious who won or lost.
I've been googling voting procedure to try and figure out what this technicality is.
Found this:
"Section 321(1) CA 2006 states that a provision of the articles is void insofar as it would have the effect of excluding the right to demand a poll at a general meeting on a question other than the election of the Chairman of the meeting or the adjournment of the meeting.
Further, section 321(2) CA 2006 provides that any provision in the company’s articles is void to the extent it makes ineffective a right to demand a poll made:
A. by not less than five members having the right to vote at the meeting; or
B. by a member or members representing not less than 10% of the total voting rights of all the members having the right to vote at the meeting (excluding any voting rights attached to any shares of the company held as treasury shares); or
C. by a member or members holding shares in the company conferring a right to vote at the meeting, being shares on which an aggregate sum has been paid up equal to not less than 10% of the total sum paid up on all the shares conferring that right (excluding any shares of the company conferring a right to vote at the meeting which are held as treasury shares).
If a poll is properly demanded and the Chairman improperly refuses to take it, any resolution passed on a show of hands will be invalid and ineffective."
No idea if this sort of thing is what is going on.
Legal shenanigans as I suspected.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
