Messrs. J. and C. Claridge Ltd., of Rushden, were summoned for failing to forward their annual return under the Companies Act, 1929, for the years 1929 and 1930.

John Wm. Claridge and Hilda Asineth Elizabeth Claridge, directors of the company, were summoned for knowingly permitting the default to be made.

It was stated that Miss Claridge was in Canada, and the case against her was not taken.

Mr. C. F. Alsopp (Northampton), prosecuted on behalf of the Board of Trade, and he said that body took a very serious view of the matter. There was a definite object in the returns being made; returns which, under the Companies Act, were available to the public at Somerset House. The information was very vital from the public point of view.

The company was registered in 1921 with a capital of £20,000, and the last return filed was for the year 1928. No further return had been filed. Miss Claridge was elected a director in June 1927. Since penalties at a rate of £5 a day were incurred when the returns became overdue, it would amount to many hundreds of pounds. The firm had been given every opportunity to comply with the law.

The accountant had written that a form of return had been sent to the company for signature, but it had never reached the department. This indicated the grossest negligence.

Considerable correspondence on the matter was quoted.

Mr. Alsopp said he had to claim penalties which came to a very heavy amount. He submitted that the defendants had treated the department with the utmost contempt, and he asked the Bench to take a very serious view of the case in the interests of the public. Mr. Alsopp also asked the Bench to provide for the costs in the case – an officer had to be called from Somerset House.

The Clerk said the penalties incurred amounted to £1,222.

Mr. J. W. Claridge, representing the company, said he had not realised the seriousness of the position. The company had been under reconstruction and he had given his attention to other aspects of the case.

The Bench retired, and on their return the Chairman said they considered the case a serious one. The Board had treated the firm with excessive patience. It was most essential in the interests of honest trading that the necessary returns to the Board of Trade should be made. The Bench were of the opinion that the defendants had no excuse.

They were liable to a fine of £910 and costs, but the company would be fined £20 for each year 1929 and 1930, and John William Claridge would be fined £10 for each of those years, and the costs would amount to £12 2s. - £72 2s. in all.

Defendants were allowed a week in which to pay.

The cases against Miss Claridge were adjourned sine die.