Qno 1:

Essentials of a valid contract.

What is a contract? 

A contract is an agreement that can be enforceable by law.   An agreement is  an offer and its
acceptance.  An agreement which can be enforceable by law must have some essential elements.
According to Section 10 "All agreements are contracts if they are made by the free consent of the
parties competent to contract, for a lawful consideration and with a lawful object, and are not hereby
expressly declared to be void" As per the above section, a contract must have the following
elements.

1.  Intention to create legal relationship.

2.  Lawful object

3.  Agreement not expressly declared void

4.  Proper offer and it s acceptance

5.  Free Consent

6.  Capacity of parties to contract

7.  Certainty of meaning.

8.  Possibility of performance.

9.  Lawful consideration

10.  Legal formalities

Intention to create legal relationship: The parties entering into a contract must have an intention
to create a legal relationship. If  there is no intention to create a legal relationship, that agreement
cannot be treated as a valid contract. Generally there is no intention to create a legal relationship in
social and domestic agreements. Invitation for lunch does not create a legal relationship. Certain
agreements and obligation between father and daughter, mother and son and husband and wife
does not create a legal relationship. An agreement wherein it is clearly mentioned that "This
agreement is not intended to create formal or legal agreement and shall not be subject to legal
jurisdiction in the law of courts." cannot be treated as a contract and not valid. 

Lawful Object: The objective of the agreement must be lawful. Any act prohibited by law will not be
valid and such agreements cannot be treated as a valid contract. A rents out his house for the
business of prostitution or for making bomb, the acts performing there are unlawful. Hence such
agreement cannot be treated as a valid contract. Therefore the consideration as well as the object of
the agreement should be lawful.
Agreement not expressly declared void: Section 24 to 30 specify certain types of agreement
which have been expressly declared void. For example Restraint of marriage which has been
expressly declared void under Section 26. If John promises to pay $50 to Mary if she does not marry
throughout her life and Mary promise not to marry at all. But this agreement cannot be treated as a
valid contract owing to the fact that, under section 26 restraint of marriage expressly declared void.
Some of the agreement which have been expressly declared void are agreement in restraint of legal
proceedings, agreement in restraint of trade, agreement in restraint of marriage and agreement by
way of wager.

Proper offer and it s acceptance: To create a valid contract, there must be two or more parties.
One who makes the offer and the other who accepts the offer. One person cannot make an offer and
accept it. There must be at least two persons. Also the offer must be clear and properly
communicated to the other party. Similarly acceptance must be communicated to the other party and
the proper and unconditional acceptance must be communicated to the offerer. Proper offer and
proper acceptance should be there to treat the agreement as a contract which is enforceable by law.

Free Consent: According to section 14, consent is said to be free when it is not caused by (i)
coercion, (ii) undue influence (iii) fraud, (iv) misrepresentation, or (v) mistake. If the contract made by
any of the above four reason, at the option of the aggrieved party it could be treated as a void
contract. If the agreement induced by mutual mistake the agreement would stand void or canceled.
An agreement can be treated as a valid contract when the consent of the parties are free and not
under any undue influence, fear or pressure etc. The consent of the parties must be genuine and
free consent.
Capacity of parties to contract: Parties entering into an agreement must be competent and
capable of entering into a contract. If "A" agrees to sell a Government property to B and B agrees to
buy that property, it could not treated as a valid agreement as A is not authorized or owner of the
property. If any of the party is not competent or capable of entering into the agreement, that
agreement cannot be treated as a valid contract. According to Section 11 of the Act which says
that every person is competent to contract who is of the age of majority according to the law to which
he is subject and who is of sound mind, and is not disqualified from contracting by any law to which
he is subject. So it is clear that the party must be of sound mind and of age to enter into a valid
agreement which can be treated as a valid contract.

Certainty of meaning: Wording of the agreement must be clear and not uncertain or vague.
Suppose John agrees to sell 500 tones of oil to Mathew. But, what kind of oil is not mentioned
clearly. So on the ground of uncertainty, this agreement stands void. If the meaning of the
agreement can be made certain by the circumstances, it could be treated as a valid contract. For
example, if John and Mathew are sole trader of coconut oil, the meaning of the agreement can be
made certain by the circumstance and in that case, the agreement can be treated as a valid
contract. According to Section 29 of the Contract Act says that Agreements, the meaning of which is
not certain or capable of being made certain, are void.
Possibility of performance: As per section 56, if the act is impossible of performance, physically or
legally, the agreement cannot be enforced by law. There must be possibility of performance of the
agreement. Impossible agreements like one claims to run at a speed of 1000km/hour or Jump to a
height of 100feet etc. would not create a valid agreement. All such acts which are impossible of
performance would not create a valid contract and cannot treated as a valid contract. In essence,
there must be possibility of performance must be there to create a valid contract.
Lawful consideration: An agreement must be supported by a consideration of something in return.
That is, the agreement must be supported by some type of service or goods in return of money or
goods. However, it is not necessary the price should be always in terms of money. It could be a
service or another goods. Suppose X agrees to buy books from Y for $50. Here the consideration of
X is books and the consideration of Y is $50. It can be a promise to act (doing something) or
forbearance (not doing something). The consideration may be present, future or can be past. But the
consideration must be real. For example If John agrees to sell his car of $ 50000 to Peter for
$20000. This is a valid contract if John agrees to sell his car not under any influence or force. It can
be valid only if the consideration of John is free. An agreement is valid only when the acts are legal.
Illegal works like killing another for money, or immoral works or illegal acts are cannot be treated as
a valid agreement. So, illegal works will not come under the contract act.

Legal formalities: The contract act does not insist that the agreement must be in writing, it could be
oral. But, in some cases the law strictly insist that the agreement must be in writing like agreement to
sell immovable property must be in writing and should be registered under the Transfer of Property
Act, 1882. These agreement are valid only when they fulfill the formalities like writing, registration,
signing by the both the parties are completed. If these legal formalities are not completed, it cannot
be treated as a valid contract.

Most important essentials of a valid contract are mentioned above. These elements should be
present in a contract to make it a valid contract. If any one of them is missing we cannot treat that
agreement as a valid contract.

BAILMENT
A legal relationship created when a person gives property to someone else for safekeeping. To
create a bailment the other party must knowingly have exclusive control over the property. The
receiver must use reasonable care to protect the property.

This word is derived from the French, bailler, to deliver. It is a compendious expression, to
signify a contract resulting from delivery. It has been defined to be a delivery of goods on a
condition, express or implied, that they shall be restored by the bailee to the bailor, or according
to his directions, as soon as the purposes for which they are bailed shall be answered. Or it is a
delivery of goods in trust, on a contract either expressed or implied, that the trust shall be duly
executed, and the goods redelivered, as soon as the time or use for which they were bailed shall
have elapsed or be performed.

Each of these definitions, says Judge Story, seems redundant and inaccurate if it be the proper
office of a definition to include those things only which belong to the genus or class. Both these
definitions suppose that the goods are to be restored or redelivered; but in a bailment for sale, as
upon a consignment to a factor, no redelivery is contemplated between the parties. In some cases,
no use is contemplated by the bailee, in others, it is of the essence of the contract: in some cases
time is material to terminAte the contract; in others, time is necessary to give a new accessorial
right.
Mr. Justice Blackstone has defined a bailment to be a delivery of goods in trust, upon contract,
either expressed or implied, that the trust shall be faithfully executed on the part of the bailee.
And in another place, as the delivery of goods to another person for a particular use.

Mr. Justice Story says, that a bailment is a delivery of a thing in trust for some special object or
purpose, and upon a contract, express or implied, to conform to the object or purpose of the trust.

Bailments are divisible into three kinds: 1. Those in which the trust is for the benefit of the
bailor, as deposits and mandates. 2. Those in which the trust is for the benefit of the bailee, as
gratuitous loans for use. 3. Those in which the trust is for the benefit of both parties, as pledges
or pawns, and hiring and letting to hire.

Some have divided bailments into five sorts, namely: 1. Depositum, or deposit. 2. Mandatum, or
commission without recompense. 3. Commodatum, or loan for use, without pay. 4. Pignori
acceptum, or pawn. 5. Locatum, or hiring, which is always with reward. This last is subdivided
into, 1. Locatio rei, or biring, by which the hirer gains a temporary use of the thing. 2. Locatio
operis faciendi, when something is to be done to the thing delivered. 3. Locatio operis mercium
vehendarum, when the thing is merely to be carried from one place to another.

QNo2:

Law of agency
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other senses of the word "agency", see Agency (disambiguation).

The law of agency is an area of commercial law dealing with a contractual or quasi-contractual, or non-

contractual set of relationships when an agent is authorized to act on behalf of another (called the Principal) to
create a legal relationship with a Third Party.[1] Succinctly, it may be referred to as the relationship between a
principal and an agent whereby the principal, expressly or impliedly, authorizes the agent to work under his
control and on his behalf. The agent is, thus, required to negotiate on behalf of the principal or bring him and
third parties into contractual relationship. This branch of law separates and regulates the relationships between:

 Agents and Principals;

 Agents and the Third Parties with whom they deal on their Principals' behalf; and

 Principals and the Third Parties when the Agents purport to deal on their behalf.

The common law principle in operation is usually represented in the Latin phrase, qui facit per alium, facit per
se, i.e. the one who acts through another, acts in his or her own interestsand it is a parallel concept to vicarious
liability and strict liability in which one person is held liable in Criminal law or Tort for the acts or omissions of
another.

Qno:2

Part IV. Rights Of Unpaid Seller Against The Goods

Section 52. (Definition of Unpaid Seller.) (1) The seller of goods is deemed to be an unpaid seller within
the meaning of the act (a) When the whole of the price has not been paid or tendered.

(b) When a bill of exchange  or other negotiable instrument has been received as
conditional payment, and the condition on which it was received has been broken by reason of the
dishonor of the instrument, the insolvency of the buyer, or otherwise.
(2) In this part of this act the term "seller" includes an agent of the seller to whom the bill of lading  has
been indorsed, or a consigner or agent who has himself paid, or is directly responsible for, the price, or
any other person who is in the position of a seller.

Section 53. (Remedies of an Unpaid Seller.) (1) Subject to the provisions of this act, notwithstanding that
the property in the goods may have passed to the buyer, the unpaid seller of the goods, as such, has (a)
A lien on the goods or right to retain them for the price while he is in possession of them;

(b) In case of the insolvency of the buyer, a right of stopping the goods in transitu after he has parted with
the possession of them;

(c) A right of resale as limited by this act;

(d) A right to rescind the sale as limited by this act.

(2) Where the property in goods has not passed to the buyer, the unpaid seller has, in addition to his
other remedies, a right of withholding delivery similar to and coextensive with his rights of lien and
stoppage "in transitu" where the property has passed to the buyer.

Qno:2(b)

Breach of contract is a legal cause of action in which a binding agreement or bargained-for exchange is

not honored by one or more of the parties to the contract by non-performance or interference with the
other party's performance. If the party does not fulfill his contractual promise, or has given information to
the other party that he will not perform his duty as mentioned in the contract or if by his action and
conduct he seems to be unable to perform the contract, he is said to breach the contract.

[edit]Minor breaches
A minor breach, a partial breach or an immaterial breach, occurs when the non-breaching party is
unentitled to an order for performance of itsobligations, but only to collect the actual amount of
their damages. For example, suppose a homeowner hires a contractor to install new plumbing and insists
that the pipes, which will ultimately be sealed behind the walls, be red. The contractor instead uses blue
pipes that function just as well. Although the contractor breached the literal terms of the contract, the
homeowner can only recover the amount of his damages. Generally, this means the difference in value
between the red pipe and the blue pipe. Since the pipes are identical value, the difference is zero;
therefore, there are no damages and the homeowner receives nothing. (See Jacob & Youngs v. Kent, on
which this example is based.)

[edit]Material breach
A material breach is any failure to perform that permits the other party to the contract to either compel
performance, or collect damages because of the breach. If the contractor in the above example had been
instructed to use copper pipes, and instead used iron pipes which would not last as long as the copper
pipes would have, the homeowner can recover the cost of actually correcting the breach - taking out the
iron pipes and replacing them with copper pipes.

As with nearly everything in the law, there are exceptions to this. Legal scholars and courts often state
that the owner of a house whose pipes are not the specified grade or quality (a typical hypothetical
example) will not be able to recover the cost of replacing the pipes for the following reasons:

1. Economic waste. The law does not favor tearing down or destroying something that is valuable (almost
anything with value is "valuable"). In this case, significant destruction of the house would be required to
completely replace the pipes, and so the law is hesitant to enforce damages of that nature. [citation needed]

2. Pricing in. In most cases of breach, a party to the contract simply fails to perform one or more terms. In
those cases, the breaching party should have already considered the cost to perform those terms and
thus "keeps" that cost when they do not perform. That party should not be entitled to keep that savings.
However, in the pipe example the contractor never considered the cost of tearing down a house to fix the
pipes, and so it is not reasonable to expect them to pay damages of that nature. [citation needed]

The result is that most homeowners will not collect damages that will compensate them for replacing the
pipe, but rather collect damages that compensate them for the loss of value in the house. For example,
say the house is worth $125,000 with copper and $120,000 with iron pipes. The homeowner would be
able to collect the $5,000 difference, and nothing more.

The Restatement (Second) of Contracts lists the following criteria to determine whether a specific failure
constitutes a breach:

In determining whether a failure to render or to offer performance is material, the following circumstances
are significant: (a) the extent to which the injured party will be deprived of the benefit which he reasonably
expected; (b) the extent to which the injured party can be adequatelycompensated for the part of that
benefit of which he will be deprived; (c) the extent to which the party failing to perform or to offer to
perform will suffer forfeiture; (d) the likelihood that the party failing to perform or to offer to perform will
cure his failure, taking account of all the circumstances including any reasonable assurances; (e) the
extent to which the behavior of the party failing to perform or to offer to perform comports with standards
of good faith and fair dealing.

American Law Institute, Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 241 (1981)

[edit]Fundamental breach
A fundamental breach (or repudiatory breach) is a breach so fundamental that it permits the aggrieved
party to terminate performance of the contract, in addition to entitling that party tosue for damages.

[edit]Anticipatory breach
A breach by anticipatory repudiation (or simply anticipatory breach) is an unequivocal indication that the
party will not perform when performance is due, or a situation in which future non-performance is
inevitable. An anticipatory breach gives the non-breaching party the option to treat such a breach as
immediate, and, if repudiatory, to terminate the contract and sue for damages (without waiting for the
breach to actually take place).

[edit]Limits on Remedies and Damages

Typically, the judicial remedy for breach of contract is monetary damages. See damages. Where the
failure to perform cannot be adequately redressed by money damage, the court may enter
an equity decree awarding an injunction or specific performance.

The aggrieved person has a duty to mitigate or reduce damages by reasonable means. Liquidated
Damages may be limited to a specific amount. In the United States, punitive damages are generally not
awarded for breach of contract but may be awarded for other causes of action in a lawsuit. Limitation of
Liability (Exculpatory) clauses. [Private agreement is permissible
Qno:3(a)

A limited liability partnership (LLP) is a partnership in which some or all partners (depending on the
jurisdiction) have limited liability. It therefore exhibits elements of partnerships and corporations.[1] In an
LLP one partner is not responsible or liable for another partner's misconduct or negligence. This is an
important difference from that of a limited partnership. In an LLP, some partners have a form of limited
liability similar to that of the shareholders of a corporation. [2] In some countries, an LLP must also have at
least one "general partner" with unlimited liability. Unlike corporate shareholders, the partners have the
right to manage the business directly. As opposed to that, corporate shareholders have to elect a board of
directors under the laws of various state charters. The board organizes itself (also under the laws of the
various state charters) and hires corporate officers who then have as "corporate" individuals the legal
responsibility to manage the corporation in the corporation's best interest. An LLP also contains a
different level of tax liability from that of a corporation.

Limited liability partnerships are distinct from limited partnerships in some countries, which may allow all
LLP partners to have limited liability, while a limited partnership may require at least one unlimited partner
and allow others to assume the role of a passive and limited liability investor. As a result, in these
countries the LLP is more suited for businesses where all investors wish to take an active role in
management.

There is considerable confusion between LLPs as constituted in the U.S. and that introduced in the UK in
2001 and adopted elsewhere - see below - since the UK LLP is, despite the name, specifically legislated
as a Corporate body rather than a Partnership.

QNo:3(b)

What is the Difference Between

Partnership and Co-ownership?
“In co-ownership, there is only a combined ownership without any business purpose. In partnership, joint
ownership and business are pooled.  ”
 It would be naïve if we call Partnership and Co-ownership as one and the same thing. The possession of a
property by more than one persons is called co-ownership. If two brothers or friends acquire property
collectively, it is a case of co- ownership. The property can only be disposed off with the approval of co-
owners. 

All the co-owners share ever kind of revenue arising from co-ownership. The property is not purchased with
the object of earning profits. If a house is purchased to let it for rent, it becomes a case of partnership and
not of co-ownership. So, any activity that is undertaken with a view to earn profit does not fall under the
purview of co-ownership.

In co-ownership, there is only a combined ownership without any business purpose. In partnership, joint
ownership and business are pooled. Partnership is based on contractual association among partners. Co-
ownership may be by a procedure of law. 

On the death of father, sons become co-owners of his possessions. On the other hand partnership is the
result of an accord. The purpose of partnership is to enter into some business and earn profits whereas co-
ownership is not meant for business intentions. 

No partner can reassign his interest without the approval off all other partners. A co-owner can transfer his
interest whenever he likes without asking from other co-owners. Partners can also act as mediators of
business. The have an indirect power to bind the firm by their acts. 

No agency affiliation exists in co-ownership. Every co-owner is answerable for his deeds only. A co-owner
can insist the division of property but in partnership such a provision is not feasible. A partner can demand
the imbursement of his share in business through cash. 

If a partner pays out some money for business he can demand its repayment. On the other hand, if a co-
owner spends money for the upgrading of property he cannot claim it by the way of a lien of property. 

Co-ownership does not require the formation of a well-defined act that can govern its functioning, whereas
such an act is mandatory in the case of partnership.

QNo:4

he difference between Private Company and Public Company?

The following differences between a private company and a public company can be drawn:

Private Company
 It's minimum number of persons is two and the maximum is 50.
 It makes the use of private limited after its name.
 It can commence its business operation after getting certificate of incorporation.
 The memorandum of association and the articles of association is signed by at least two persons.
 The filling of both memorandum and article of association is obligatory.
 It does not require the filling of the prospectus or statement-in-lieu of prospectus.
 It cannot sell shares to the general public in the open market.
 Transfer of share is restricted in the articles of association.
 There are of least two directors and they need not retire by rotation.
 There is no legal restriction on director's remuneration.
Public Company
 It's minimum number of persons is seven and the maximum is unlimited.
 It makes the use of the word limited after the name.
 It requires both the certificate of incorporation and the certificate of commencement for its commencement.
 It's memorandum and articles of association is signed by at least seven persons.
 It may not have its own articles of association because it may adopt table 'A'.
 It must file prospectus or statement in lieu of prospectus before allotment of shares.
 it sell shares to the general public in the open market.
 Transfer of shares is not restricted and as such shares are freely transferable and are quoted in the stock
exchange.
 it has at least 3 directors and they are subject to retire by rotation.
 The directors cannot draw remuneration more than 11 percent of the net profit of the company.

QNo:5

01. What is a company director?

A company director is a person duly appointed by the members of the company to manage the

company on their behalf.

02. Are there a minimum number of directors required in a company?

Yes. Every company is required under the Companies Act to have a minimum of two directors.

The responsibility for appointing directors lies with the members and/or shareholders of the

company.

03. How are company directors appointed?

 The first directors of a company are the persons who gave their consent to become directors

and are listed in the incorporation documents filed in the Companies Registration Office (CRO).

Subsequent appointments and resignations in most companies take place at the company’s

Annual General Meeting (AGM) where the members elect the directors. If a director resigns or

leaves during the year, the board of directors may co-opt a person to fill the vacancy until the

next AGM when the appointed person is eligible for re-election.

A company’s own Articles of Association normally set out the rules for the appointment and

resignations of directors and the minimum and maximum number allowed.

04. Can a company director be removed from office?

Yes - generally. A company may by ordinary resolution at a meeting remove a director before

the expiration of his period of office. Extended notice of 28 days is required and the director is

entitled to be heard on the resolution at the meeting. If the director is the holder of the office

for life he cannot be removed.

05. Is there a limit on the number of directorships a person can hold?

Yes. Section 45 of the Companies (Amendment)(No. 2) Act 1999, states that a person shall

not be a director of more than 25 companies. However there are some exceptions to this rule,

for example groups of companies are treated as one company for the purposes of this section.

06. Are all directors of Irish companies required to reside in the State?

No. The Companies Act requires that a company should have one director resident in the

European Economic Area (EEA)  (the EU States plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway). If no

director is resident in the EEA, the company must hold a bond to the value of €25,395. If

companies can prove they have a permanent place of business in the State they can also

avoid this obligation. Details in relation to these exceptions are available on the CRO website.

07. Can a director be restricted?

Yes. ODCE and other persons such as liquidators can apply to the High Court to have a

director restricted. This normally happens when a company cannot pay its debts and the

directors cannot satisfy the Court that they acted honestly and responsibly in the company.

Restriction orders are for a period of five years and confines a person to being a director in

certain types of companies that have been adequately capitalised by their shareholders.
08. Can a person be disqualified from acting as a director?

Yes. The High Court may disqualify anyone whom it is satisfied is guilty of fraud or is in breach

of their obligations under company law, for example guilty of two or more offences of not

keeping proper company books of account, or guilty of three or more company law defaults,

Persons can also be disqualified if the Court finds that their behaviour makes them unfit to be

a director.

09. Can a person be automatically disqualified as a director?

Yes. Persons convicted in the Circuit Court or higher of an indictable offence relating to a

company or involving fraud or dishonesty are automatically disqualified for five years from

acting as company officers (directors, secretary, auditor, liquidator, etc.) Also, if a person is

disqualified in another State and fails to notify the Registrar of Companies on appointment as

a director they are automatically disqualified. Where a person that is restricted acts except in

the circumstances allowed (company is capitalised adequately) the person is guilty of an

offence and if convicted can be disqualified. And a director who allows a company to be struck

off the register of companies for failing to file annual returns and that company owes money

can be disqualified.

10. Where can I undertake a search of a disqualified/registered director?

The Companies Registration Office (CRO) maintains a register of disqualified/restricted

directors.

11. Is there a prohibition on loans by companies to directors and connected

persons?

Yes. Section 31 of the Companies Act 1990 prohibits a company from giving loans or quasi-

loans or entering into a credit transaction as creditor or providing security guarantees to a

director of the company or to a person connected with the director. There are certain

exceptions to this rule and these are set out in Sections 32 to 37 of the Companies Act 1990. 

Membership of a company

1. Who can be a member of a company?

 The rules governing membership of a company are normally set out in the company’s Articles

of Association. A member is usually, but not always, one of the company’s owners whose

name has been entered on the register of members. The initial subscribers to a company’s

memorandum of association are deemed to have agreed to become members of the company.

2. Is there a limit on the number of members of companies?

Yes. A private limited company has a minimum of one member and a maximum of 99

members, and a public limited company has a minimum of 7 members and no maximum

number set under the Companies Acts.

3. What is a shareholder?

A shareholder is a person who holds a share or shares in a company. The shareholder will

become a member of the company when their name is entered into the register of members.

4. How to cease membership of a company?

In a company limited by shares the process is by the transfer of the share. In a company

limited by guarantee - the Articles of Association should set out the process by which the

member can relinquish their membership.

5. Is there a requirement to keep a register of members?

Yes. The Companies Acts require every company to keep a register of its members at the

company’s registered office. The register should contain the name and address of each

member, the date on which each member was entered on the register and the date on which

they ceased to be members. If the company has a share capital the register should also

contain the number of shares held by each member.

6. Who can inspect the register of members?

Any member of the company may inspect the register free of charge, and any other person

may inspect the register on the payment of a nominal fee. A member or any other person may

request a copy of the register from the company on the payment of a fee. Refusal or default

by the company or any officer of the company in relation to the register is an offence.
Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan

Agency overview

Formed January 1 1999

Jurisdiction Pakistan

Headquarters  Islamabad, Pakistan

Agency executive Salman Ali Shaikh, Chairman

Website

http://www.secp.gov.pk

The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) is a government agency whose purpose is

to develop a modern and efficient corporate sector and a capital market based on sound regulatory principles,
in order to foster economic growth and prosperity in Pakistan.[citation needed]
 Contents

 [hide]

1 History

2 Status after passage of 18th amendment to the 1973 constitution of

Pakistan

3 Location

4 Footnotes

5 See also

6 External links

[edit]History

The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan was created to succeed the Corporate Law Authority,
which was an attached Department of the Ministry of Finance. The process of restructuring the Authority was
initiated in 1997 under the Capital Market Development Plan of the Asian Development Bank (ADB).
A Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act was passed by the Parliament and promulgated in
December 1997. In pursuance of this Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, having
autonomous status, became operational on January 1 1999. [1] The Act gave the organization the administrative
authority and financial independence to carry out the reform program of Pakistan’s capital market with the
assistance of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). Powers of the Commission have been delegated to the
individual Commissioners and Appellate Benches, as envisaged in the Act.

The scope of the authority of the Commission has been extensively widened since its creation. The insurance
sector, non-banking financial companies, and pension funds have been added to the purview of the
Commission. Now the Commission's mandate includes investment financial services, leasing
companies,housing finance services, venture capital investment, discounting services, investment advisory
services, real estate investment trust[2] and asset management services, etc. The Commission also regulates
various external service providers that are linked to the corporate sector, like chartered accountants, rating
agencies, corporate secretaries and others.

[edit]Status after passage of 18th amendment to the 1973 constitution of

Pakistan

The status of SECP of Pakistan is unclear after the passage of the 18th amendment which abolishes the
concurrent legislative list. As subjects 6 to 11 and 26 to 28 of the concurrent list deal with corporate law,
registration and regulation it is likely, barring any intervention from the provinces, that the SECP would be
disbanded once the 18th amendment becomes law in April of 2011. The provinces has already agreed upon
dissolution of the Ministry of Industries and Production.

Company
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For other uses, see Company (disambiguation).

The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of
the subject. Pleaseimprove this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (April 2010)

Companies law

Company · Business
Sole proprietorship

Partnership
(General · Limited · LLP)

Corporation
Cooperative

United States

S corporation · C corporation
LLC · LLLP · Series LLC
Delaware corporation
Nevada corporation
Massachusetts business trust

UK / Ireland / Commonwealth

Limited company
 (by shares · by guarantee
Public · Proprietary)

Unlimited company
Community interest company

European Union / EEA

SE · SCE · SPE · EEIG

Elsewhere

AB · AG · ANS · A/S · AS · GmbH
K.K. · N.V. · OY · S.A. · more

Doctrines

Corporate governance
Limited liability · Ultra vires
Business judgment rule
Internal affairs doctrine

De facto corporation and

corporation by estoppel

Piercing the corporate veil

Rochdale Principles

Related areas

Contract · Civil procedure

v • d • e

A company is a form of business organization.

In the United States, a company is a corporation—or, less commonly, an association, partnership, or union—

that carries on an industrial enterprise."[1] Generally, a company may be a "corporation, partnership,
association, joint-stock company, trust,fund, or organized group of persons, whether incorporated or not, and
(in an official capacity) any receiver, trustee in bankruptcy, or similar official, or liquidating agent, for any of the
foregoing."[1]

In English law, and therefore in the Commonwealth realms, a company is a form of body corporate or
corporation, generally registered under the Companies Acts or similar legislation. It does not include
a partnership or any other unincorporated group of persons.

Contents

 [hide]

1 Meaning and

etymology

2 History

3 Types

4 See also

5 References

6 Further reading

[edit]Meaning and etymology

A company can be defined as an "artificial person", with a discrete legal entity, perpetual succession and

a common seal. It is not affected by the death, insanity or insolvency of an individual member.

The English word company has its origins in the Old French military term compaignie (first recorded in 1150),
meaning a "body of soldiers",[2] originally taken from the Late Latin word companio "companion, one who eats
bread with you", first attested in the Lex Salica as a calque of the Germanic expression *gahlaibo (literally, "with
bread"), related to Old High German galeipo "companion" and Gothic gahlaiba "messmate". By 1303, the word
referred to trade guilds. Usage of company to mean "business association" was first recorded in 1553 and the
abbreviation "co." dates from 1769.

Companies law (or the law of business associations) is the field of law concerning companies and

other businessorganizations. It is an establishment formed to carry on commercial enterprises.[1] This
includes corporations, partnershipsand other associations which usually carry on some form of economic
or charitable activity. The most prominent kind of company, usually referred to as a "corporation", is a
"juristic person", i.e. it has separate legal personality, and those whoinvest money into the business
have limited liability for any losses the company makes, governed by corporate law. The largest
companies are usually publicly listed on stock exchanges around the world. Even single individuals, also
known assole traders may incorporate themselves and limit their liability in order to carry on a business.
All different forms of companies depend on the particular law of the particular country in which they
reside.

The law of business organizations originally derived from the common law of England, but has evolved
significantly in the Twentieth century. In common law countries today, the most commonly addressed
forms are:

 Corporation
 Limited company
 Unlimited company
 Limited liability partnership
 Limited partnership
 Not-for-profit corporation
 Partnership
 Sole proprietorship

The proprietary limited company is a statutory business form in several countries, including Australia.

Many countries have forms of business entity unique to that country, although there are equivalents
elsewhere. Examples are the Limited-liability company (LLC) and the limited liability limited
partnership (LLLP) in the United States.

Other types of business organisations, such as cooperatives, credit unions and publicly owned

enterprises, can be established with purposes that parallel, supersede, or even replace the profit
maximization mandate of business corporations.

For a country-by-country listing of officially recognized forms of business organization, see Types of

business entity.

There are various types of company that can be formed in different jurisdictions, but the most common
forms of company are:

 a company limited by guarantee. Commonly used where companies are formed for non-
commercial purposes, such as clubs or charities. The members guarantee the payment of certain
(usually nominal) amounts if the company goes intoinsolvent liquidation, but otherwise they have no
economic rights in relation to the company .
 a company limited by guarantee with a share capital. A hybrid entity, usually used where the
company is formed for non-commercial purposes, but the activities of the company are partly funded
by investors who expect a return.
 a company limited by shares. The most common form of company used for business ventures.
 an  unlimited company either with or without a share capital. This is a hybrid company, a company
similar to its limited company (Ltd.) counterpart but where the members or shareholders do not
benefit from limited liability should the company ever go into formal liquidation.

There are, however, many specific categories of corporations and other business organizations which
may be formed in various countries and jurisdictions throughout the world.