Click the case name for better results:

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

In Re Neptune (Vehicle Washing Equipment) Ltd: Neptune (Vehicle Washing Equipment) Ltd v Fitzgerald: ChD 2 Mar 1995

A sole company director must still have company meetings before entering into a contract even if only he will be present. When a director’s claim to the validity of a contract or arrangement depends upon his disclosure of it at a meeting, he must show that he has in letter and spirit complied with the … Continue reading In Re Neptune (Vehicle Washing Equipment) Ltd: Neptune (Vehicle Washing Equipment) Ltd v Fitzgerald: ChD 2 Mar 1995

Lee Panavision Ltd v Lee Lighting Ltd: CA 1992

The court considered an allegation of a failure to declare an interest to a company board meeting, met by a defence that the undeclared interest was common to and known by each of the directors. Held: Dillon LJ said: ‘if the judge was entitled to make findings of non-disclosure and non-declaration of interests that he … Continue reading Lee Panavision Ltd v Lee Lighting Ltd: CA 1992

Guinness plc v Saunders: CA 1988

[1988] 1 WLR 863 Companies Act 1985 317 England and Wales Cited by: Cited – DEG-Deutsche Investitions und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH v Koshy and Other (No 3); Gwembe Valley Development Co Ltd (in receivership) v Same (No 3) CA 28-Jul-2003 The company sought to recover damages from a director who had acted dishonestly, by concealing a … Continue reading Guinness plc v Saunders: CA 1988

Express Newspapers v Telegraph Group Ltd: CA 15 Mar 2002

The parties entered into a joint venture for the provision of printing resources. This survived until one member company changed hands, when there were disagreements about a shareholder’s agreement. There were difficulties of construction. Held: Because this was a pure construction of a commercial agreement, there was no restriction on appellate jurisdiction to interpret the … Continue reading Express Newspapers v Telegraph Group Ltd: CA 15 Mar 2002

RFC 2012 Plc (Formerly The Rangers Football Club Plc) v Advocate General for Scotland: SC 5 Jul 2017

The Court was asked whether an employee’s remuneration is taxable as his or her emoluments or earnings when it is paid to a third party in circumstances in which the employee had no prior entitlement to receive it himself or herself. Held: The company’s appeal failed. The purposive approach to the interpretation of the general … Continue reading RFC 2012 Plc (Formerly The Rangers Football Club Plc) v Advocate General for Scotland: SC 5 Jul 2017

Fowler v Gruber: SCS 10 Mar 2009

(Outer House) Citations: [2009] ScotCS CSOH 36, 2009 GWD 24-381, [2010] 1 BCLC 563 Links: Bailii Statutes: Companies Act 1985 459 Jurisdiction: Scotland Company Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.317910

Saab and Another v Saudi American Bank: CA 29 Jul 1999

When serving an English writ on an oversea company’s premises in London, it was not necessary for the allegation to be in respect of business issues wholly or even substantially arising here, only that there is a real element of such business conducted here. Citations: Times 29-Jul-1999, Gazette 11-Aug-1999 Statutes: Companies Act 1985 694A, Oversea … Continue reading Saab and Another v Saudi American Bank: CA 29 Jul 1999

Fassihim, Liddiardrams, International Ltd, Isograph Ltd v Item Software (UK) Ltd: CA 30 Sep 2004

The first defendant (F) had been employed by a company involved in a distribution agreement. He had sought to set up a competing arrangement whilst a director of the claimant, and diverted a contract to his new company. Held: A company director has additional, fiduciary duties over and above those of an employee. The duties … Continue reading Fassihim, Liddiardrams, International Ltd, Isograph Ltd v Item Software (UK) Ltd: CA 30 Sep 2004

Cramaso Llp v Ogilvie-Grant, Earl of Seafield and Others: SC 12 Feb 2014

The defenders owned a substantial grouse moor in Scotland. There had been difficulties with grouse stocks, and steps taken over years to allow stocks to recover. They had responded to enquiries from one Mr Erskine with misleading figures. Mr Erskine formed a company, the appellant, to take a lease. The company now appealed rejection of … Continue reading Cramaso Llp v Ogilvie-Grant, Earl of Seafield and Others: SC 12 Feb 2014

South Carolina Insurance Co v Assurantie Maatschappij de Zeven Provincien NV: HL 1987

There can be little basis for the grant of relief to a landowner providing protection from an action in nuisance if the landowner will not himself remedy the public nuisance. The House considered whether the circumstances gave the court power to . .