Mr. Douglas in addressing the Court on the point of consolidation ofthe actions said that his difficulty was that several matters were brought in on which no declaration was now required. If his Lordship promised consolidation, he thought that Mr. Jones should put in an amended writ and amend his statement of claim, otherwise there would be great confusion with long writs and statements of claim, part of which had gor out. He thought that it would lead to confusion if the case were tried with fall pleadings in both actions when great deal in first one and then the other was not required.
His Lordship ssid that it seemed to him that firet of all there was a claim in the first action for a declaration that the anonol meeting for 1909 had not been held, or that the resolution of September 30 last was bad, and that th Id be an order to bold the meeting. Now counsel asked, at least it followed from paragraphs 1, 2 sod 5 of the second 0, for a declaration that the meeting had beea held.
Mr, Jones ssid that they had meeting on Febraary 15, bat it was not concluded.
His Lordsbip—Do you say that that is the same meeting as the fi rat Mr. Jones—That is" matter for argument at the trial.
His Lordship—I want to know now what you are going to contead, Mr. Joner—We want to contend that on Febrasry 15 1910, valid] Bon appointments of directora wore m:
His Lordshi Il make an order for consolidation and yon will have to file your statement of defence withia june, but you can apply for of time if so advised. You can apply by sammons in Chambers it any particular paragraphs of the two statements of claim are embarrassing, to have one or other of them strack oat.
Yon can make any such application as you please. I shall order you to file defence in this action, but if yon find anything embarrassing in the present statements of claim, you can make ap application.
On the question of the appointment of a Reoeiver, Mr. Jones said that be would like to direct his Lordship's attention to two cases on this point, and on which he relied in support ut his application in this connex His Lordship asked if there were any affidavits.
Mr. Jones said that there were affix davits filed by Mr. R. Dallas and Mr.
Sinnecker. Mr. Jones quoted from Carr on Injunctions, and cited the case of Featherstone ook (L. R. 16, Equity cases. page 298) and the case which followed, Trade Anxilia Ca. Vickers. The position of this Company at the present moment, counsel ssid, was that the plaintiffs claimed that they were directors, that,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.