Proceeding contribution from Viscount Bledisloe (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 16 May 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Company Law Reform Bill [HL].
Company Law Reform Bill [HL]
My Lords, I am not saying that he is prevented: he can say that he has been removed because they do not like his face. The question is whether the statement is made within the scope of the Act and therefore whether it is one for which he will receive qualified privilege. If he rambles on about the chairman’s drinking habits or something, he is not forbidden from doing so, but it is hardly a statement within the scope of the Act. What is important is that he is allowed to make the statement that he needs to make, and to ensure that it is properly protected from defamation proceedings.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 682 c147
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disciplinary proceedings Disclosure of information Audit Accountancy Company law Company accounts Companies Liability EU law Documents Exemptions Internet Qualifications Staff Public records Private companies Registration Shares Shareholders
- Legislation
- Company Law Reform Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 19:54:12 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322144
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322144
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_322144