▁where ▁such ▁was ▁otherwise ▁absent . ▁ ▁There ▁was ▁no ▁mer it , ▁the ▁court ▁found , ▁in ▁the ▁submission ▁that ▁the ▁first ▁pla int iff ▁could ▁not ▁be ▁a ▁univers itas ▁because ▁it ▁did ▁not ▁possess ▁a ▁written ▁constitution . ▁Although ▁advis able , ▁it ▁was ▁not ▁essential ▁for ▁a ▁univers itas ▁to ▁have ▁a ▁constitution . ▁According ly , ▁the ▁mere ▁fact ▁that ▁the ▁first ▁pla int iff ▁had ▁no ▁written ▁constitution ▁was ▁not ▁determin ative ▁of ▁the ▁question ▁of ▁whether ▁or ▁not ▁it ▁had ▁loc us ▁stand i . ▁ ▁Whether ▁or ▁not ▁the ▁first ▁pla int iff ▁was ▁a ▁univers itas , ▁therefore , ▁had ▁to ▁be ▁decided ▁with ▁regard ▁to ▁its ▁nature , ▁its ▁object ▁and ▁it ▁activities . ▁From ▁a ▁reading ▁of ▁the ▁particular s ▁of ▁claim , ▁it ▁was ▁clear ▁to ▁the ▁court ▁that ▁the ▁rights ▁and ▁interests ▁referred ▁to ▁were ▁those ▁ar ising ▁from ▁a ▁contract ▁entered ▁into ▁between ▁the ▁def endant ▁and ▁a ▁labour ▁union ▁( the ▁Transport ▁and ▁General ▁Work ers ▁Union ) ▁representing ▁persons ▁who ▁were ▁employed ▁by ▁the ▁said ▁corpor ation ▁prior ▁to ▁its ▁dissol ution . ▁The ▁conclusion ▁was ▁in es cap able : ▁The ▁first ▁pla int iff ▁was ▁formed ▁for ▁a ▁very ▁limited ▁purpose ; ▁once ▁that ▁purpose ▁was ▁achieved , ▁there ▁would ▁be ▁no ▁further ▁need ▁for ▁it , ▁and ▁it ▁would ▁ce ase ▁to ▁exist . ▁The ▁very ▁object ▁of ▁the ▁association ▁neg ated ▁an ▁intention ▁that ▁it ▁would ▁have ▁perpet ual ▁succession ▁and ▁hold ▁property