Of course. Amendment No. 102 will remove the last line and a half of Clause 96, which says,"““and . . . that the company is a public company””."
Clause 96(1) says:"““If on an application for re-registration as a public company the registrar is satisfied””,"
and so on. Does it not need to say at the end, in subsection (5)(b), that the company is a public company? It may be self-evident, but there are an awful lot of things that we thought were self-evident in the Bill that the Government feel we should leave in, so I should have thought that it should stay there.
Company Law Reform Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 1 February 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Company Law Reform Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
678 c138GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:23:00 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_296692
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_296692
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_296692