- Cited — DnaNudge Limited v Ventura Capital GP Limited 2023-10-09
“…evant background facts for the purposes of interpretation of articles of association must be very limited: see e.g. Attorney-General of Belize v Belize Telecom [2009] 1 WLR 1988 (PC) (“Belize Telecom”) at [35]-[36], and Re Coroin Ltd, McKillen v Misland (Cyprus) Investments Ltd [2011] EWHC 3466 (Ch) at [63].…”
- Cited — Tariq Mahmood Malik v Mahboob Hussain Jr & Ors 2023-01-11
“…cision on this point, marginalising the contrary view expressed by Lord Hoffmann in the Privy Council case of Att-Gen of Belize v Belize Telecom [2009] UKPC 10;[2009] 1 WLR 1988. The authoritative nature of Lord Neuberger’s analysis has been affirmed in several subsequent decisions, including National Health Service Commissioning Board…”
- Cited — Zavarco Plc v Ranjeet Singh Sidhu 2022-07-22
“…ple involved in the formation of the company. See generally Bratton Seymour Service v Oxborough [1992] BCLC 693 and Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom [2009] 1 WLR 1988 (PC) at [35]-[37]. The admissible background could plainly include the statement of capital and initial shareholdings filed with the Registrar together with th…”
- Cited — Joseph v Deloitte NSE LLP (Rev 1) 2020-11-05
“…It may seem heretical these days, but it is worth recalling what Lord Hoffmann said in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd [2009] UKPC 10, [2009] 1 WLR 1988:…”
- Cited — Parker & Anor v Roberts 2019-02-07
“…onstruction and implication were the same thing. Although that once appeared to be the law (see Attorney-General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd [2009] UKPC 10, [2009] 1 WLR 1988) the law has moved on. We have been told in no uncertain terms by the Supreme Court that interpretation and implication are different; and that a term can only…”
- Cited — Ukraine v The Law Debenture Trust Corporation Plc (Rev 1) 2018-09-14
“…is hard to think that it would not be reasonable and equitable. Fourthly, as Lord Hoffmann I think suggested in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd [2009] 1 WLR 1988, para 27, although Lord Simon’s requirements are otherwise cumulative, I would accept that business necessity and obviousness, his second and third requirement…”
- Cited — Bou-Simon v BGC Brokers LP 2018-07-05
“…is hard to think that it would not be reasonable and equitable. Fourthly, as Lord Hoffmann I think suggested in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd [2009] 1 WLR 1988, para 27, although Lord Simon's requirements are otherwise cumulative, I would accept that business necessity and obviousness, his second and third requirement…”
- Cited — London Borough of Lambeth v Secretary of State for Communities And Local Government & Ors 2018-04-20
“…atton Seymour Service Co Ltd v Oxborough [1992] BCLC 693, upon which Lord Hoffmann commented in Attorney-General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd [2009] UKPC 10, [2009] 1 WLR 1988. He said:…”
- Cited — Leibson Corporation & Ors v TOC Investments Corporation & Ors 2018-04-17
“…rict requirements for implication of terms articulated in cases such as: Attorney-General of Belize and others v Belize Telecom Ltd and another [2009] UKPC 10, [2009] 1 WLR 1988; and Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Limited and another [2015] UKSC 72; were not satisfied.…”
- Cited — J N Hipwell & Son v Szurek 2018-03-28
“…struction and the process of implying terms both involve determining the scope and meaning of the contract (see Attorney-General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd [2009] 1 WLR 1988, and [26] in Marks & Spencer), the process of implication involves a rather different exercise from that of construction, and calls for strict restraint: see p…”