Maddocks v DJE Constructions Pty Ltd

For the reasons given above the argument that in the circumstances of this case the appellant can be a member or shareholder notwithstanding that his name was not on the register must be rejected. The terms of the Companies Act itself make that argument untenable.

The appellant sought rectification which was refused by the Court of Appeal. Upon the assumption that the notice of appeal was adequate to challenge the decision of the Court of Appeal in this respect, he has failed to advance any argument which could result in the register being rectified or there being some declaration in his favour.

That conclusion having been reached, it becomes unnecessary to consider the question of illegality under s. 67 of the Companies Act. A decision in the appellant's favour on that point could not improve his position since he is not on the register and his appeal against the rejection of his application to rectify the register has failed.