How each of this design can be utilized to study the effects ofamount of time playing video games on obesity? Give an example of each of this design. Or Give an example of each Longitudinal design,...

Running Header: Northside Development Pty Ltd V Registra
Title: Northside Development Pty Ltd V Registrar
Presented By:
Presented To:
Date: 24/09/2017
Northside Developments Pty Ltd V Registrar General
2

Preface:
Northside Developments Pty Ltd V Registrar General is a particular case related with Section
127 which indicates the liability of the Registrar general. The key focus area of the total
discussion made in the report is about the company seal on the documents which is argued in
accordance to the section 106 and section 51(A) to be authentic and can be relied on. These
considerations are raised by the respondents and argued like any inquiry would not have been
called on the Barclays based on these reasons. Further internal management rule is applied in
that case by the respondents. According to which, the persons dealing with the company does
not require to inquire whether the company is properly and duly performing internally. There
is no need to doubt the internal management of the organization and it can be assumed to be
fairly well and in accordance with the constitution and legislator powers. In this regard the
indoor management rule and its relation with the usage of the company seal is examined in
NSW court of Appeal (in Registrar- General Vs North side developments Pty Ltd and Ors)
and further on appeal from that decision the case is re-examined by the High court of
Australia. Court realized the conditions that differed the application of the internal
management rule emphasizing the fact that North side has not actually acted in its own
interest, as well the company secretary whose sign is made on the execution deed is not valid
as his appointment is not valid. The first orders in the NSW are suspended by the hight court
and the orders are rendered favouring the appellant. The following part of the write-up
discusses the case in detail. Further report presents the conclusions made in the case along
with the discussion of the case proceedings. The discussion is provided with systematic
a
angement of the facts, detailing of the rules and the final conclusion indicating the
judgement in the case.
Discussion
Back-Ground to the case (FACTS)
NorthSide Developments Pty Ltd (Northside) was formed with the basic intention to hold
certain land in the French Forest in NSW. The three directors of the company are John Lees,
Robert Ellis and Robert Sturgess. The total shares of the company are solely shared between
them. In this set-up one of the directors Robert Sturgess appointed his son as secretary in the
place of Mr.Horder who is working as accountant as well as the secretary for the
organization. Mr.Robert Sturgess has signed a statutory return in this direction. Gerard
sturgess the son the Robert Sturgess signed the consent to act as secretary for the
organization. However the remaining directors did not know of the happening as well they
Northside Developments Pty Ltd V Registrar General
3

did not actually disputed the appointment. In this direction the actual appointment of the
Gerard Sturgess is invalid and disputable. Now the dispute is about the instrument purporting
to be a mortgage of the land executed by Northside under its common seal, infavor of
Barclays Credit corporations Holdings Pty Ltd to secure a loan of $1.4 million made to the
company controlled by Robert Sturgess. As the loan is not paid Barclays executed its power
of sale and the sold the land to a purchaser. Subsequent to this action, indefeasibility
provisions of the Real property act operated to deprive Northside of its land. Subsequently
company commenced actions against the Registrar general to obtain damages in this regard.
The key facts that are focussed are that the execution of the sale is ca
ied over without the
knowledge of the other directors of the company. The sole approval obtained in this case are
concerned only with the usage of the common seal by the Robert Sturgess and his son
without any approved or granted authority from the company to do so. However still the
NSW court of appeal Judge Ki
y P, opinioned that all the...