9911796707
TMI Blog1963 (7) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y and he was privately examined under section 268 on April 24 and 29, 1963. At that private examination, in accordance with the usual practice, a shorthand note of his evidence was taken and a transcript was made from that shorthand note, but he objects to signing the transcript. Section 268, so far as now material, provides as follows: "(1) The court may, at any time after the appointment of a provisional liquidator or the making of a winding-up order, summon before it any officer of the company ... (2) The court may examine him on oath concerning the matters aforesaid, either by word of mouth or on written interrogatories, and may reduce his answers to writing and require him to sign them." Rule 72(1) of the Companies (Winding-up) (Am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd writer to take notes applies to a private examination. The practice is nearly a hundred years old as appears from Sir John Moore Mining Company In re [1878] W.N. 87 where the report states : "The examining party had taken in a shorthand writer, who had taken down in full everything that had passed. The chief clerk did not himself take down the evidence and had not called upon the witness to sign it." After objection had been taken to using the examination, the Vice-Chancellor said; "That the everyday practice in examinations before the registrars in bankruptcy was exactly similar to that directed by the Companies Act. The registrar did not take the examination himself, but a sworn shorthand writer was attached to the court. When th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shorthand writer should take down what is so read out. This procedure seems to me to be inconvenient to a degree. Indeed it would be impracticable in the case of the complex matters dealt with in companies' winding up, for the shorthand writer to formulate the gist of the answers in that way, and I think it is much more burdensome that the registrar should do it than that the questions and answers should be taken down by the shorthand writer. Mr. Sheridan relied on the difference in wording between sub-section (2) of section 268 and sub-section (7) of section 270 of the Act in relation to public examinations where the words used are: "Notes of the examination shall be taken down in writing, and shall be read over to or by, and signed by, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to sign it before he has done so. In making that comment, I am not accepting the allegation on the part of the respondent that he was told to read it there and then and to sign it, because this affidavit was, as I have said, sworn at the last moment and the liquidator has had no opportunity of answering it. As regards the last complaint, it happens in most transcripts that there are a number of errors of more or less importance, and the person concerned is normally entitled to correct those errors and is not bound to sign a transcript which contains what appear to be errors. I am informed by the registrar that the ordinary procedure in such circumstances is for the person concerned to make pencil corrections in the margin of the transcript ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
