<?xml version="1.0"?>
<law><site_title>Virginia Decoded</site_title><site_url>https://vacode.org</site_url><law_id>370740</law_id><section_number>56-84</section_number><catch_line>Application or petition by public service company and affiliates; hearing; action of Commission; conditions imposed on foreign corporations</catch_line><edition url="https://vacode.org/2026/" slug="2026" current="TRUE" last_updated="2026-08-02">2026</edition><structure><unit label="title" level="1" order_by="121" identifier="56">Public Service Companies</unit><unit label="chapter" level="2" order_by="5" identifier="4">Regulation of Relations With Affiliated Interests</unit></structure><text>
						<section><p>In every case wherein the approval of the <span class="dictionary">Commission</span> is required of any <span class="dictionary">contract</span>, arrangement, loan, extension or renewal thereof, assumption of obligation or liability, renewal or extension thereof, or any transaction or act, an application or <span class="dictionary">petition</span>, duly executed and verified by any such <span class="dictionary">public service company</span> and by each and every <span class="dictionary">corporation</span>, partnership, association or <span class="dictionary">person</span> constituting an <span class="dictionary">affiliated interest</span>, who are parties to such transaction or act, shall be presented to and filed with the <span class="dictionary">Commission</span> which, upon <span class="dictionary">hearing</span>, either formal or informal, as may be determined by the <span class="dictionary">Commission</span>, may, in addition to passing upon the propriety of the proposed transaction or act subject to approval under this chapter, pass upon all questions of <span class="dictionary">jurisdiction</span> of the <span class="dictionary">Commission</span> and upon whether any <span class="dictionary">party</span> is, as a matter of <span class="dictionary">fact</span> and <span class="dictionary">law</span>, an <span class="dictionary">affiliated interest</span>. And in any such proceeding the <span class="dictionary">Commission</span> may require, as a condition <span class="dictionary">precedent</span> to an approval or action upon the proposed transaction or act, any other <span class="dictionary">corporation</span>, partnership, association or <span class="dictionary">person</span> which it appears to the <span class="dictionary">Commission</span>, prima facie, is or might be an <span class="dictionary">affiliated interest</span>, to join, or to be joined, as a <span class="dictionary">party</span> to the proceeding. And the <span class="dictionary">Commission</span> may, in its discretion, impose any condition as to obtaining a license to transact business in Virginia on the part of any foreign <span class="dictionary">corporation</span> which it appears would contravene any provision of Article 17 (&#xA7;&#xA0;<a class="law" title="Authority to transact business required" href="/13.1-757/">13.1-757</a> et seq.) of Chapter 9 of Title 13.1 by the performance of the proposed transaction or act or may require any such foreign <span class="dictionary">corporation</span> to submit to the <span class="dictionary">jurisdiction</span> of the <span class="dictionary">Commission</span> under &#xA7;&#xA0;<a class="law" title="Application for certificate of authority" href="/13.1-759/">13.1-759</a> or otherwise for a determination of such question, whenever the public interest and the due enforcement of this chapter and of other <span class="dictionary">laws</span> under the <span class="dictionary">jurisdiction</span> of the <span class="dictionary">Commission</span> appear to require such course.</p></section></text><history>1938, p. 22; Michie Code 1942, &#xA7; 3774i2.</history><metadata><court_decisions><item key="0"><name> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. Carl R. Stillman v. Norfolk &amp; Western Railway Company, a .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </name><case_number>86-1105</case_number><citation>811 F.2d 834</citation><date>1987-02-17</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/483263/carl-r-stillman-v-norfolk-western-railway-company-a-corporation/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. ERVIN, Circuit Judge: .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html>Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</court_html></item><item key="1"><name>Metzger v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service</name><case_number>93-2112</case_number><citation>38 F.3d 118</citation><date>1994-10-18</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/680717/metzger-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue-service/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. 38 F.3d 118 .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html>Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</court_html></item><item key="2"><name> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. John Matala v. Consolidation Coal Company, and Ray Marshall, .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </name><case_number>80-1287</case_number><citation>647 F.2d 427</citation><date>1981-07-21</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/389958/john-matala-v-consolidation-coal-company-and-ray-marshall-secretary-of/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. 647 F.2d 427 .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html>Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</court_html></item><item key="3"><name>Scoric v. United States</name><case_number>No. 1256</case_number><citation>217 F. 871</citation><date>1914-09-08</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8809243/scoric-v-united-states/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. WOODS, Circuit Judge. .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html>Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</court_html></item><item key="4"><name>Roberts v. CSX Transp., Inc.</name><case_number>090194</case_number><citation>688 S.E.2d 178</citation><date>2010-01-15</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1058248/roberts-v-csx-transp-inc/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. 688 S.E.2d 178 (2010) .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html><abbr title="Supreme Court of Virginia">SCV</abbr></court_html></item><item key="5"><name>Sloas v. CSX Transportation, Inc.</name><case_number>09-1249, 09-1288</case_number><citation>616 F.3d 380</citation><date>2010-07-26</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/151543/sloas-v-csx-transportation-inc/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. 616 F.3d 380 (2010) .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html>Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</court_html></item><item key="6"><name>Metzger v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service</name><case_number>No. 93-2112</case_number><citation>38 F.3d 118</citation><date>1994-09-01</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7030491/metzger-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue-service/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. Affirmed by published opinion. Judge WILLIAMS wrote the majority opinion, in which Judge PAYNE .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html>Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</court_html></item><item key="7"><name>Matala v. Consolidation Coal Co.</name><case_number>Nos. 80-1287, 80-1288</case_number><citation>647 F.2d 427</citation><date>1981-04-24</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8923951/matala-v-consolidation-coal-co/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. ERVIN, Circuit Judge: .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html>Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</court_html></item><item key="8"><name>Conner v. Hendrix</name><case_number>Record 3907</case_number><citation>194 Va. 17</citation><date>1952-09-10</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1365093/conner-v-hendrix/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. Spratley, J., .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html><abbr title="Supreme Court of Virginia">SCV</abbr></court_html></item><item key="9"><name>Fisher v. United States</name><case_number>2261</case_number><citation>2 F.2d 843</citation><date>1924-10-29</date><url>https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1487095/fisher-v-united-states/</url><abstract> .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. WOODS, Circuit Judge. .&#x202F;.&#x202F;. </abstract><court_html>Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</court_html></item></court_decisions></metadata></law>
