Citations:
[2004] ECComm 2
Links:
Jurisdiction:
European
Company, Commercial
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.216337
[2004] ECComm 2
European
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.216337
There was a sale of a share in a partnership, which had become insolvent since the contract.
Held: The House ordered rescission and mutual restitution, though the misrepresentation was not fraudulent, and it gave ancillary directions so as to work out the equities. A former partner remains liable for the partnership debts incurred while he was, ‘de facto’ a member of the partnership. Lord Watson: ‘I entertain no doubt that these misrepresentations, although not fraudulently made, are sufficient to entitle the respondent to rescind the arrangement of February 1883, if he is in a position to give as well as to demand restitution.’
Lord Watson
(1888) 13 App Cas 308
England and Wales
Appeal from – Newbigging v Adam CA 1886
A party seeking rescission of a contract must give back all that he received. The purpose of rescission is still to restore the parties as nearly as possible to the position in which they were before the contract was made. Bowen LJ said: ‘when you . .
Cited – Halpern and Another v Halpern and others ComC 4-Jul-2006
The court considered whether a party can avoid a contract procured by duress in circumstances where he cannot offer the other party substantial restitutio in integrum.
Held: Unless the claimant could offer counter-restitution, the remedy of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.214455
In cases alleging corporate fraud it is necessary to look very carefully at the nature and limits of the authority before considering whether the questioned transaction is in truth a transaction authorised by the company.
(1988) 88 Cr App R 385
England and Wales
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Gomez HL 3-Dec-1992
The defendant worked as a shop assistant. He had persuaded the manager to accept in payment for goods, two cheques which he knew to be stolen. The CA had decided that since the ownership of the goods was transferred on the sale, no appropriation of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.214206
The company directors operated an elaborate scheme to extract value from Belmont by causing it to buy the shares of a company called Maximum at a considerable overvalue. This was a breach of the fiduciary duties of the directors. They sought to recycle the profit on the sale of Maximum so that it could be used to fund the purchase by three companies associated with the directors of Belmont’s own shares. This was not only a breach of the directors’ fiduciary duty but a criminal contravention of section 54 of the 1948 Act. Belmont went into liquidation, and an action was brought in its name by receivers for damages for breach of duty against the directors who had authorised the transaction, and for an account on the footing of knowing receipt against the three companies.
Held: An employee’s knowledge is not to be treated as the employer’s knowledge: ‘But in my view such knowledge should not be imputed to the company, for the essence of the arrangement was to deprive the company improperly of a large part of its assets. As I have said, the company was a victim of the conspiracy. I think it would be irrational to treat the directors, who were allegedly parties to the conspiracy, notionally as having transmitted this knowledge to the company; and indeed it is a well recognized exception from the general rule that a principal is affected by notice received by his agent that, if the agent is acting in fraud of his principal and the matter of which he has notice is relevant to the fraud, that knowledge is not to be imputed to the principal. So in my opinion the plaintiff company should not be regarded as party to the conspiracy on the ground of lack of necessary guilty knowledge.’
Buckley LJ
[1979] Ch 250, [1978] 3 WLR 712, [1979] 1 All ER 118
England and Wales
See also – Belmont Finance Corporation Ltd v Williams Furniture Ltd (No 2) 1980
It had been alleged that there had been a conspiracy involving the company giving unlawful financial assistance for the purchase of its own shares.
Held: Dishonesty is not a necessary ingredient of liability in an allegation of a ‘knowing . .
See also – Belmont Finance Corporation Ltd v Williams Furniture Ltd (No 2) 1980
It had been alleged that there had been a conspiracy involving the company giving unlawful financial assistance for the purchase of its own shares.
Held: Dishonesty is not a necessary ingredient of liability in an allegation of a ‘knowing . .
Applied – Attorney-General’s Reference (No. 2 of 1982) CACD 1984
Two men were charged with theft from a company which they wholly owned and controlled. The court considered the actions of company directors in dishonestly appropriating the property of the company, and whether since the title to the goods was . .
Cited – Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others SC 12-Jun-2013
In the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce, questions arose regarding company assets owned by the husband. The court was asked as to the power of the court to order the transfer of assets owned entirely in the company’s names. The . .
Cited – Jetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others SC 22-Apr-2015
The liquidators of Bilta had brought proceedings against former directors and the appellant alleging that they were party to an unlawful means conspiracy which had damaged the company by engaging in a carousel fraud with carbon credits. On the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.214198
The issue and allotment of bonus shares, once accepted by the allottee shareholder, involves a relationship between the company and the shareholder analogous to a contractual relationship.
Scott J
[1991] BCLC 424
Cited – EIC Services Ltd European Internet Capital Ltd v Phipps, Paul, Barber CA 30-Jul-2004
Whether issue of additional shares had been properly authorised . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.199726
The defendant received price-sensitive information. He was acquitted of ‘obtaining’ the information, the judge finding that he had done nothing positive to acquire it. On appeal the court held that no such act was required,
Held: Nothing further was required than to have received the information, to be found to have obtained it. Parliament must have intended the wider meaning to include ‘coming into possession of’. The court followed three steps in interpreting the provision. The literal approach was insufficient, and nor was the purposive approach. They applied the Black-Clawson approach in resolving the ambiguity found in the statute. Nevertheless the defendant was acquitted.
Lord Lowry
[1989] 2 WLR 729
Company Securities (Insider Dealing) Act 1985 1(3)
England and Wales
Appeal from – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 1 of 1988) CACD 19-Oct-1988
The defendant received price-sensitive information. The Attorney-General appealed his acquittal, the judge having directed the jury that in order to have ‘obtained’ information within the subsection, he must have carried out some act, that he had . .
Applied – Director of Public Prosecutions v Ottewell HL 1968
The antecedent criminal history of an offender is a factor which may be taken into account in determining the sentence to be imposed, but it cannot be given such weight as to lead to the imposition of a penalty which is disproportionate to the . .
Applied – Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof Aschaffenburg AG HL 5-Mar-1975
Statute’s Mischief May be Inspected
The House considered limitations upon them in reading statements made in the Houses of Parliament when construing a statute.
Held: It is rare that a statute can be properly interpreted without knowing the legislative object. The courts may . .
Appealed to – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 1 of 1988) CACD 19-Oct-1988
The defendant received price-sensitive information. The Attorney-General appealed his acquittal, the judge having directed the jury that in order to have ‘obtained’ information within the subsection, he must have carried out some act, that he had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.198912
(Canada) Indirect financial assistance in purchase of company’s shares.
(1980) DLR (3d) 257
Cited – Harlow and Another v Loveday and Another; In re Hill and Tyler Ltd (in administration) ChD 28-May-2004
The administrators challenged the validity of a charge which appeared to have been given by the company to secure the purchase of shares in the company.
Held: The loan itself did not amount to assistance, but the charge did. It was indirect . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.198129
British Eagle, which had gone into liquidation. The parties disputed a contract attempting to reset the ranking of debts. The House was asked whether there was a debt due to the insolvent company at the commencement of its winding-up, to which the netting-off provisions of the IATA clearing house rules then applied.
Held: (bare majority) It was not open to parties to contract out of mandatory provisions and that any attempt to do so was void. The appeal succeeded. A clearing house arrangement between a large number of airline companies relating to debts arising as between them was ineffective as against the liquidator of one of the companies. Insofar as the arrangement purported to apply to debts which existed when the members of the company passed the resolution to go into creditors’ voluntary liquidation, it would have amounted to contracting out of the statutory requirement that the assets owned by the company at the date of its liquidation should be available to its liquidator, who should use them to meet the company’s unsecured liabilities pari passu, under section 302 of the 1948 Act. Any purported ‘contracting out’ of the insolvency legislation is contrary to public policy, and such contractual provisions will be disapplied.
Lord Cross discussed ex parte Mackay, saying: ‘In Ex p Mackay 8 Ch App 643, the charge on [the] second half of the royalties was . . an animal known to the law which on its face put the charge[e] in the position of a secured creditor. The court could only go behind it if it was satisfied – as was indeed obvious in that case – that it had been created deliberately in order to provide for a different distribution of the insolvent’s property on his bankruptcy from that prescribed by the law.’
Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, though dissenting, agreed that Ex p Mackay was a case where the relevant provisions were ‘a clear attempt to evade the operation of the bankruptcy laws’, or ‘a device for defeating the bankruptcy laws’.
Lord Cross of Chelsea, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Lord Diplock and Lord Edmund-Davies
[1975] 1 WLR 758, [1975] 2 All ER 390
England and Wales
Appeal from – British Eagle International Airlines Ltd v Compagnie National Air France CA 1974
. .
Cited – Ex parte Mackay; Ex parte Brown; In re Jeavons 1873
Mr Jeavons sold a patent regarding the manufacture of armour plates to a Brown and Co and Cammell and Co in consideration of the companies paying royalties. There was also a loan from the company to Mr Jeavons secured on the royalties. The parties . .
Cited – Commissioners of Inland Revenue v The Wimbledon Football Club Limited, Ellis, Earp CA 28-May-2004
The Commissioners appealed against a refusal of their application for a revocation of the defendant’s voluntary arrangement in that it had failed to comply with section 4. They complained that the arrangement was unfair to them. It had been agreed . .
Cited – Belmont Park Investments Pty Ltd v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd and Another SC 27-Jul-2011
Complex financial instruments insured the indebtedness of Lehman Brothers. On that company’s insolvency a claim was made. It was said that provisions in the documents offended the rule against the anti-deprivation rule. The courts below had upheld . .
Cited – International Air Transport Association v Ansett Australia Holdings Ltd 6-Feb-2008
(High Court of Australia) The rules of the clearing house scheme had been modified following the British Eagle decision so as to exclude any liability or right of action for payment between member airlines.
Held: (by a majority, Kirby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.197873
A contributory, when petitioning for the winding up of a company, must plead in his petition and prove by evidence that, if a winding up order is made, there is a contingent surplus of assets in the winding up which will be available for distribution to him.
[1879] 11 ChD 36
England and Wales
Cited – Rodencroft Limited, W. G. Birch Developments Limited, H-M Birch Limited; Simon Allso v The Secretary for State for Trade and Industry ChD 23-Apr-2004
The Secretary of state sought the winding up of the companies saying it was expedient in the public interest to do so. A shareholder opposed this saying that the companies were solvent.
Held: The shareholder had, in the absence of any position . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.197024
In the case of a creditor’s petition not opposed by other creditors: ‘I agree with what has been said, that it is not a discretionary matter with the court when a debt is established, and not satisfied, to say whether the company should be wound up or not; that is to say if there be a valid debt established, valid both at law and in equity. One does not like to say positively that no case could occur in which it would be right to refuse it; but, ordinarily speaking, it is the duty of the court to direct the winding up.’
Lord Cranworth
[1865] 11 HL Cas 389
England and Wales
Cited – Re Camburn Petroleum Products Ltd ChD 1979
The court heard a contributors’ petition. The directors were in deadlock with equal shareholdings. The petition was not making good progress, and a creditor’s petition was then issued. The shareholder sought a stay.
Held: There was a . .
Cited – Rodencroft Limited, W. G. Birch Developments Limited, H-M Birch Limited; Simon Allso v The Secretary for State for Trade and Industry ChD 23-Apr-2004
The Secretary of state sought the winding up of the companies saying it was expedient in the public interest to do so. A shareholder opposed this saying that the companies were solvent.
Held: The shareholder had, in the absence of any position . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.197020
Nourse J
[1985] 2 All ER 908
England and Wales
Distinguished – In Re Portbase Clothing Ltd; Mould v Taylor 1993
The company had given two debentures, one fixed and one floating. Their priority was fixed by a deed of priority. On insolvency the liquidator sought direction as to the application of the assets.
Held: The deed made the bank’s floating charge . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.195884
There was nothing in the 1862 Act or in any other Act requiring the memorandum of a company to contain any reference to the rights of shareholders in the capital of the company inter se, and so: ‘The division of the capital into shares of a certain fixed amount which must appear in the memorandum would not be altered or affected by issuing some of the shares as preference shares.’ What is fair and equitable must depend on the circumstances of each case.
Lord Macnaghten, Lord Watson
[1894] AC 399
England and Wales
Cited – Winpar Holdings Ltd v Ransomes Plc CA 1-Jul-1999
The company had been given permission to cancel a share premium account. Changes in circumstances brought the matter back for reconsideration. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.195962
The court considered the arguments presented as to the duty of a director of a company to disclose his own breach of fiduciary duty: ‘Counsel . . submitted, as a general proposition, that, putting fraud on one side, there is no general duty on directors or employees to disclose a breach of duty on their part. As I understood his argument he recognised in the case of fiduciaries, such as directors, if they have failed to account for secret profits which they had made, then their failure to account must necessarily involve in consequence a failure to reveal a breach of duty which had given rise to that duty to account. Counsel . . put in the forefront of the authorities on which he relied a dictum . . in Bell and Lever Bros Ltd . . There is, in my judgment, much force in counsel’s (Mr Powles) submission. Indeed counsel for the plaintiff’s (Mr Thoresby) argument, that a director is under a duty to disclose any breach of duty on his part before an agreement of the kind in the present case was entered into, could lead to the extravagant consequence that the director might have to make what counsel for the defendant (Mr Powles) has called a ‘confession’ as a prerequisite of such an agreement. But, in my judgment, it is not necessary to decide in this case whether counsel for the defendant’s (Mr Powles) submission is correct, because, as I have read the judgment of the judge, having regard to the facts found by him, no breach of duty was committed by the defendant in this case, before the termination agreement was made.’
Robert Goff LJ
[1984] BCLC 549
England and Wales
Cited – Bell v Lever Brothers Ltd HL 15-Dec-1931
Contract – Mutual Mistake Test
Bell was director and chairman of Niger, a subsidiary of Lever Brothers Ltd who dismissed him, offering and paying pounds 30,000 compensation. Lever then discovered that Mr Bell had made secret profits at the expense of Niger for which he could have . .
Cited – Healey v Societe Anonyme Francais Rubastic 1917
A director of the company claimed arrears of salary for work done notwithstanding that he had been summarily dismissed for misconduct. There was no question of a claim for damages for breach of duty. . .
Appeal from – Horcal Ltd v Gatland ChD 1983
Directors have a positive duty to disclose breaches of fiduciary duty. A failure by a director of a company, as opposed to an employee, to disclose an earlier breach of fiduciary duty would render an agreement terminating his contract of service (on . .
Cited – Sybron Corporation v Rochem CA 1983
There was an allegation that the employee had failed to disclose breaches of contract by fellow employees. This had taken place at a time when a decision was being taken as to the payment to be made to him under the terms of a pension scheme. The . .
Appealed to – Horcal Ltd v Gatland ChD 1983
Directors have a positive duty to disclose breaches of fiduciary duty. A failure by a director of a company, as opposed to an employee, to disclose an earlier breach of fiduciary duty would render an agreement terminating his contract of service (on . .
Cited – Tesco Stores Limited v Pook, Pook, Universal Projects (UK) Limited ChD 14-Apr-2003
A trustee in breach of his duty has a duty to disclose that breach. It was alleged that the defendants, including a director of the claimant, had submitted false invoices to the claimants, and purchased property with the resulting profits.
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.194876
D had advanced monies to a distillery company on the security of manufactured whisky stored in a warehouse. On the occasion of each advance, the company delivered to D an invoice and a warrant which described the particulars of the whisky and stated that it was deliverable to D or his assigns.
Held: A person against whom the unauthorised liquidator is litigating may not object to such lack of authorisation, for it is a matter between the liquidator and the creditors. Lord Parker stated: ‘in my opinion s.151 of the Companies (Consolidation) Act, 1908, which enables a liquidator in the case of a winding-up in Ireland to bring or defend legal proceedings with the sanction of the Court, was not intended to confer, and does not confer, on third parties any right to object to proceedings brought by a liquidator in the name of the company, on the ground that no such sanction has been obtained.’
Delivery of the subject property is absolutely necessary to complete a pledge, although the transfer of possession may be actual or constructive: ‘There are, however, cases in which possession may pass to the pledgee without actual delivery, for example, whenever there is some agreement between the parties the effect of which is to change the possession of the pledger from a possession on his own account as owner into a possession as bailee for the pledgee: see Meyerstein v. Barber.(1) Such an agreement operates as a delivery of the goods to the pledgee and a redelivery of the goods by the pledgee to the pledger as bailee for the purposes mentioned in the agreement. A mere book entry cannot, however, have this effect . .’
The terms of the warrant were ambiguous. Lor Parker said that if the true meaning of the warrant was that it was intended to be an acknowledgement by the distillery company that it held the goods referred to as bailee for D or his assigns by indorsement: ‘it is sufficient to change the nature of the company’s possession, operating as an actual delivery of the goods to [D], and a redelivery of the same goods by him to the company to hold as bailee for him. Under these circumstances, on the hypothesis that the company was in actual possession, [D] obtained a good pledge at common law.’
Lord Parker of Waddington
[1914] AC 823, 111 LT 8
Companies (Consolidation) Act 1908
England and Wales
Cited – Borealis Ab v Stargas Limited and Others and Bergesen Dy A/S Berge Sisar Dorealis Ab v Stargas Limited and Others HL 27-Mar-2001
The ship came to port, and samples of the cargo proved contaminated. The carrier asserted that the consignee was to be deemed to have demanded delivery, and had so assumed the risk. The court found that the mere taking of samples was not such a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.194545
A company director has duties to the company’s creditors as well as the shareholders. ‘Equity is not a computer. Equity operates on conscience . .’
Lord Templeman
[1986] 1 WLR 1512
England and Wales
Cited – The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Goldberg, Mcavoy ChD 26-Nov-2003
The Secretary of State sought a disqualification order. The director argued that one shoul not be made in the absence of some breach of legal duty, some dishonesty should be shown.
Held: The answer was a mixture of fact and law. A breach of . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.188616
The power to make by-laws encompasses not only a company’s principle activity, but also all incidental and ancillary activities. The incidental power cannot be used to expand the company’s activities, in this case by extending its business by operating its own buses from its terminus.
[1907] AC 415
England and Wales
Applied – Hazell v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council HL 1991
Swap deals outwith Council powers
The authority entered into interest rate swap deals to protect itself against adverse money market movements. They began to lose substantial amounts when interest rates rose, and the district auditor sought a declaration that the contracts were . .
Cited – National Aids Trust v National Health Service Commissioning Board (NHS England) Admn 2-Aug-2016
NHS to make drug available
The claimant charity said that drugs (PrEP) prophylactic for AIDS / HIV should be made available by the defendant and through the NHS. The respndent said that the responsibility for preventative medicine for sexual health lay with local authorities. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.187652
(High Court of Australia) ‘the inflexible rule that, except under the authority of a provision in the articles of association, no director shall obtain for himself a profit by means of a transaction in which he is concerned on behalf of the company unless all the material facts are disclosed to the shareholders and by resolution a general meeting approves of his doing so or all the shareholders acquiesce. An undisclosed profit which a director so derives from the execution of his fiduciary duties belongs in equity to the company. It is no answer to the application of the rule that the profit is of a kind which the company itself could not have obtained, or that no loss is caused to the company by the gain of the director. It is a principle resting upon the impossibility of allowing the conflict of duty and interest which is involved in the pursuit of private advantage in the course of dealing in a fiduciary capacity with the affairs of the company. If, when it is his duty to safeguard and further the interests of the company, he uses the occasion as a means of profit to himself, he raises an opposition between the duty he has undertaken and his own self interest, beyond which it is neither wise nor practicable for the law to look for a criterion of liability. The consequences of such a conflict are not discoverable. Both justice and policy are against their investigation.’
Rich, Dixon and Evatt JJ
(1936) 54 CLR 583
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 financial interest in a different company which had made loans to the claimant company. He replied that the claim was out of time. At first instance the . .
Cited – Ultraframe (UK) Ltd v Fielding and others ChD 27-Jul-2005
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
Cited – O’Donnell v Shanahan and Another CA 22-Jul-2009
The claimant appealed against dismissal of her petition for an order for the defendants to purchase her shares at a fair value, saying that they had acted unfairly toward her. Her co-directors had acquired, for another company of which they were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.187425
For a valuation for estate taxes, the value is what a purchaser in the open market would have paid to enjoy whatever rights attached to the property at the relevant date.
Lord Russell of Killowen said that a share is the interest of a shareholder in the company measured by a sum of money for the purpose of liability in the first place and of interest in the second, but also consisting of a series of mutual covenants entered into by all the shareholders inter se in accordance with . . the Companies Act . . a share is an interest measured by a sum of money and made up of various rights contained in the contract, including the right to a sum of money of a more or less amount.
Lord Russell of Killowen
[1937] AC 26
England and Wales
Approved – Borland’s Trustee v Steel Brothers and Co Ltd 1901
Mr Borland was a shareholder. The company’s articles contained pre-emption rights, such that on a shareholder’s bankruptcy, he had, on receiving a transfer notice from the directors, to transfer his shares to a manager or assistant at a fair value . .
Cited – Gray v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 24-Feb-1994
Partnership interests in a tenanted freehold estate can be valued together. The court considered the ‘statutory hypothetical sale’ when valuing property for Inheritance Tax purposes: ‘The property must be assumed to have been capable of sale in the . .
Cited – Lonsdale (T/A Lonsdale Agencies) v Howard and Hallam Ltd HL 4-Jul-2007
The claimant sought compensation after his commercial agency was terminated. The court had found that the agency was declining in turnover, and reduced the compensation accordingly. There had been no written agreement for the agency, and six months’ . .
Cited – Grays Timber Products Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 3-Feb-2010
An assessment to income tax had been raised after the employee resold shares in the company issued through the employees’ share scheme at a price which the Revenue said was above the share value. The company appealed against a finding that tax was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.186960
Disputes between shareholders should not be settled with assistance form the funds of the company.
(1989) 5 BCC 37
Cited – BAS Capital Funding Corporation, Deutsche Bank Ag London, Paine Webber Capital Inc, PW Exe Lp, Pw Partners 1999 Lp v Medfinco Limited, Abacus Holdings Limited, Andreas W Gerdes, HTC Inc, etc ChD 25-Jul-2003
The claimants wanted to bring actions in respect of various matters under shareholders agreements in complex international joint ventures. Leave was given to serve English proceedings in Malta, and the claim form and particulars of claim were faxed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.186469
A company’s money should not be expended on disputes between the shareholders.
(1872) LR 14 Eq 322
Cited – BAS Capital Funding Corporation, Deutsche Bank Ag London, Paine Webber Capital Inc, PW Exe Lp, Pw Partners 1999 Lp v Medfinco Limited, Abacus Holdings Limited, Andreas W Gerdes, HTC Inc, etc ChD 25-Jul-2003
The claimants wanted to bring actions in respect of various matters under shareholders agreements in complex international joint ventures. Leave was given to serve English proceedings in Malta, and the claim form and particulars of claim were faxed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.186468
In the absence of any contractual obligation otherwise, the funds of a mutual society must be distributed equally on a dissolution.
[1979] 1 WLR 936
England and Wales
Cited – Elvridge v Coulson ChD 15-Jul-2003
An unregistered friendly society was dissolved. The governing instrument provided that the votes should be counted according to value, and that a vote of five sixths of such members by value were need to dissolve the company. Members claimed to be . .
Cited – Hunt and Another v McLaren and others ChD 4-Oct-2006
Land had been given to a football club under a trust for its exclusive use as such. That land was sold and a new ground acquired and a stadium built, but the land was subject to restrictive covenenats limiting its use to sports, which considerably . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185827
An unregistered friendly society was dissolved. The governing instrument provided that the votes should be counted according to value, and that a vote of five sixths of such members by value were need to dissolve the company. Members claimed to be allowed a proprotion of the sums realised on dissolution also according to their value.
Held: The presumption was that the assets should be divided equally. The arrangements for voting were insufficiently connected to raise any implication to the contrary. The constitution had merely imported wording from the 1896 Act.
Peter Smith J
Times 27-Aug-2003, Gazette 18-Sep-2003, [2003] EWHC 2089 (Ch).
Friendly Societies Act 1896 78(2) 70(6)
England and Wales
Cited – In re Bucks Constabulary Widows and Orphans Fund Friendly Society (No 2) 1979
In the absence of any contractual obligation otherwise, the funds of a mutual society must be distributed equally on a dissolution. . .
Cited – Hunt and Another v McLaren and others ChD 4-Oct-2006
Land had been given to a football club under a trust for its exclusive use as such. That land was sold and a new ground acquired and a stadium built, but the land was subject to restrictive covenenats limiting its use to sports, which considerably . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185826
A company associated with the mortgagee purchased the land taken into possession by the mortgagee. The court considered the extent of its duties.
Held: ‘The mortgagee and the company seeking to uphold the transaction must show that the sale was in good faith and that the mortgagee took reasonable precautions to obtain the best price reasonably obtainable at the time.’ It does not matter that the time may be unpropitious and that by waiting a higher price could be obtained: he is not bound to postpone in the hope of obtaining a better price.
Lord Templeman
[1983] 1 WLR 1349
England and Wales
Cited – Newport Farm Ltd and 22 others v Damesh Holdings Ltd and others PC 7-Jul-2003
(New Zealand) The clamaints alleged that mortgagees had failed to take proper steps to obtain the best price on selling their properties as mortagees. The common law duty had been encapsulated in the 1952 Act. Here, however the landowners had . .
Cited – Silven Properties Ltd and Another v Royal Bank of Scotland Plc and Others CA 21-Oct-2003
The claimants complained that the receivers appointed by the bank had failed to get the best price for properties charged to the bank and sold, in that they had failed to obtain planning permissions which would have increased the values of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.184563
The court considered the principles applicable in construing a partnership agreement.
Harman J said: ‘The doctrine of repudiation and other contractual provisions applied to a partnership contract whether made by a deed or orally in the same way as it did to all other contracts. Equity had acted in aid of the law, and the Partnership Act 1890 was not a complete code; it did not rule out the laws of contract which equity had been acting in aid of.’
Harman J
[1982] 80 LS Gaz 550
Distinguished – Mullins v Laughton and Others ChD 19-Dec-2002
The claimant asserted that his partners had repudiated the partnership by their conduct toward him. He continued that he had accepted the repudiation, and that therefore the partnership was dissolved.
Held: The Hurst case had been on the basis . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183452
The Plaintiff, a widow, in the year 1880, caused pounds 6000 Consols to be transferred into the joint names of herself and the Defendant, who was her godson. She did so with the express intention that the Defendant, in the event of his surviving her, should have the Consols for his own benefit, but that she should have the dividends during her life; and she had previously been warned that if she made the transfer she could not revoke it. The first notice the Defendant had of the transaction was a letter from the Plaintiff’s solicitors about the end of 1882 claiming to have the fund retransferred to the Plaintiff. Held, that the legal title of the Defendant as a joint tenant of the stock was complete, although he had not assented to the transfer until he was requested to join in re-transferring the stock, for that the legal title of a transferee of stock is complete without acceptance.
A transfer of property to a person without his knowledge, if made in proper form, vests the property in him at once, subject to his right to repudiate it when informed of the transfer.
Held, further, that the Plaintiff could not claim a re-transfer on equitable grounds, the evidence clearly shewing that she did not, when she made the transfer, intend to make the Defendant a mere trustee for her except as to the dividends. Held, therefore (affirming the decision of Mr. Justice Pearson), that the Plaintiff was not entitled to have the stock re-transferred to her.
A gift of shares was made, but challenged.
Held: Registration of the transfer was actually completed and so the gift was completely constituted.
(1885) 31 Ch 282, [1885] UKLawRpCh 282
England and Wales
At ChD – Standing v Bowring ChD 1-Jul-1884
The Plaintiff, a widow, in the year 1880 caused a sum of pounds 6000 Consols to be transferred into the joint names of herself and the Defendant, who was her godson, and in whose welfare she took great interest. This transfer was not made known to . .
Cited – Pennington and Another v Waine, Crampton and others CA 4-Mar-2002
The deceased had made a gift of shares. She had executed a transfer, and acting upon the promise, the donee had agreed to become a director which he could only do if he also became a shareholder. The transfer was delivered to the deceased’s agent, . .
Cited – Scott v Bridge and Others ChD 25-Nov-2020
Claim to recover money and property said to have been transferred by the claimant to the defendants or one or more of them. The money concerned came from a bank account belonging to the claimant. The property concerned consisted of two . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183421
The company contributories petitioned for the restoration of the company so that they could get in a sum of money standing to the credit of the company’s account at a building society.
Held: Fairness required that the restoration should be on terms that time should not run during the period of dissolution against creditors whose claims were not statute-barred at the date of dissolution whose claims were not statute-barred at that date: ‘…. what I have to do is put all other persons – not only the company, but all other persons – in the same position as nearly as may be as if the name of the company had not been struck off. At the date of the dissolution, the creditors …. who were not statute-barred at the date of dissolution …. could have stopped the statute running by issuing, possibly serving, a writ. [Counsel for the petitioner] contends that the creditor could also have applied to restore the name of the company to the register and then have issued his writ. Of course he could, but that is not the same position, nor is it, in my judgment, the nearest that can be done to get to the ‘as-youwere position’; and it seems to me that, when a company has been dissolved and therefore nobody can sue it without getting it restored to the register, it is only common fairness that, if the contributories for purposes of their own, want to get it restored to the register years afterwards, the period [of dissolution] should be disregarded for the purposes of the Statute of Limitations. …. Common justice requires that some such provision should be inserted.’
Roxburgh J
[1956] 1 WLR 1397
Cited – Whitbread (Hotels) Ltd and Another v Walkmore (95) Ltd OHCS 4-Jan-2002
Where application was made to restore a company to the register, to face court action, the court should look at the issues of limitation, and at how any delays had arisen.
Held: The court should be aware of the potential prejudice created by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183436
A valuer’s certificate was binding where he as expert had valued machinery himself whereas his instructions were to employ an expert valuer of his choice to do that. He had also he valued the shares on a break-up basis whereas he was instructed to use a going-concern basis. Ungoed-Thomas J said: ‘the defendant’s contention that an error in principle does not vitiate a valuation unless it is shown by the person relying on it that it also results in a materially different valuation, both in the part of the valuation subject to error and in the overall valuation.’
Ungoed-Thomas J
[1971] 1 WLR 840
Cited – Veba Oil Supply and Trading Gmbh v Petrotrade Inc CA 6-Dec-2001
A dispute between parties to a contract was to be determined by an independent expert. It was claimed that his report was not binding on the parties, since he had departed from his instructions in a material way. In this context, what constituted a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183278
cw The petitioners’ case was that they had a legitimate expectation that the company’s business would be sold, either by virtue of an agreement to that effect or at their request, was not made out on the facts.
Jonathan Parker J
(2000) 2 BCLC 321
Approved – Anderson v Hogg IHCS 14-Dec-2001
The appellant sought an order under the section for repayment to the company of sums paid to a director by way of extra redundancy payments. He said the payments were improper. His application had been refused, in part because he had not chosen the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183215
Where there has been material misconduct, even in the shape of a single act, the primary remedy is under section 459, not by a shareholder’s derivative action.
[1996] 1 BCLC 262
Cited – Anderson v Hogg IHCS 14-Dec-2001
The appellant sought an order under the section for repayment to the company of sums paid to a director by way of extra redundancy payments. He said the payments were improper. His application had been refused, in part because he had not chosen the . .
Cited – Clark v Cutland CA 18-Jun-2003
One director discovered that his co-director had withdrawn substantial sums from the company. . .
Cited – Iesini and Others v Westrip Holdings Ltd and Others ChD 16-Oct-2009
The claimants were shareholders in Westrip, accusing the Defendant directors of deliberately engaging in a course of conduct which has led to Westrip losing ownership and control of a very valuable mining licence and which, but for their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183212
(New Zealand Court of Appeal) Thomas J said: ‘the diminution in the value of Mr and Mrs Christensen’s shares in the company is by definition a personal loss and not a corporate loss. The loss suffered by the company is the loss of the lease and the profit which would have been obtained from harvesting the potato crop. That loss is reflected in the diminution in the value of Mr and Mrs Christensen’s shares. They can no longer realise their shares at the value they enjoyed prior to the alleged default of their accountants and solicitors.’ and ‘We do not need to enter upon a close examination of the Newman Industries decision. It has attracted not insignificant and, at times, critical comment. See eg L C B Gower, Gower’s Principles of Modern Company Law (5th ed, 1992) at pp 647-653; L S Sealy, ‘Problems of Standing, Pleading and Proof in Corporate Litigation’ (Ed, B.G. Pettit) at p 1 esp at pp 6-10; and M J Sterling, ‘The Theory and Policy of Shareholder Actions in Tort’ (1987) 50 MLR. 468, esp at pp 470-474. It may be accepted that the Court of Appeal was correct, however, in concluding that a member has no right to sue directly in respect of a breach of duty owed to the company or in respect of a tort committed against the company. Such claims can only be bought by the company itself or by a member in a derivative action under an exception to the rule in Foss v Harbottle (1843) 2 Hare 461. But this is not necessarily to exclude a claim brought by a party, who may also be a member, to whom a separate duty is owed and who suffers a personal loss as a result of a breach of that duty Where such a party, irrespective that he or she is a member, has personal rights and these rights are invaded, the rule in Foss v Harbottle is irrelevant. Nor would the claim necessarily have the calamitous consequences predicted by counsel in respect of the concept of corporate personality and limited liability. The loss arises not from a breach of duty owed to the company but from a breach of duty owed to the individuals. The individual is simply suing to vindicate his own right or redress a wrong done to him or her giving rise to a personal loss.
Thomas J continued: ‘We consider, therefore, that it is certainly arguable that, where there is an independent duty owed to the plaintiff and a breach of that duty occurs, the resulting loss may be recovered by the plaintiff. The fact that the loss may also be suffered by the company does not mean that it is not also a personal loss to the individual. Indeed, the diminution in the value of Mr and Mrs Christensen’s shares in the company is by definition a personal loss and not a corporate loss. The loss suffered by the company is the loss of the lease and the profit which would have been obtained from harvesting the potato crop. That loss is reflected in the diminution in the value of Mr and Mrs Christensen’s shares. They can no longer realise their shares at the value they enjoyed prior to the alleged default of their accountants and solicitors. (For a discussion of the policy issues which arise in considering these questions, see Sterling (supra) at pp 474-491.) In circumstances of this kind the possibility that the company and the member may seek to hold the same party liable for the same loss may pose a difficulty. Double recovery, of course, cannot be permitted. The problem does not arise in this case, however, as the company has chosen to settle its claim. Peat Marwick and McCaw Lewis accepted a compromise in the knowledge that Mr and Mrs Christensen’s claim was outstanding. It may well be, as was acknowledged by Mr Pidgeon in the course of argument, that an allowance will need to be made for the amount already paid to the liquidator in settlement of the company’s claim. It is to be acknowledged, however, that the problem of double recovery may well arise in other cases. No doubt, such a possibility is most likely with smaller private companies where the interrelationship between the company, the directors and the shareholders may give rise to independent duties on the part of the professional advisers involved. But the situation where one defendant owes a duty to two persons who suffer a common loss is not unknown in the law, and it will need to be examined in this context. It may be found that there is no necessary reason why the company’s loss should take precedence over the loss of the individuals who are owed a separate duty of care. To meet the problem of double recovery in such circumstances it will be necessary to evolve principles to determine which party or parties will be able to seek or obtain recovery. A stay of one proceeding may be required. Judgment, with a stay of execution against one or other of the parties, may be in order. An obligation to account in whole or in part may be appropriate. The interest of creditors who may benefit if one party recovers and not the other may require consideration. As the problem of double recovery does not arise in this case, however, it is preferable to leave an examination of these issues to a case where that problem is squarely in point. ‘
and ‘Essentially, Mr and Mrs Christensen are alleging that as a result of Peat Marwick and McCaw Lewis’s breach of duty owed to them personally they suffered a personal loss, that is, a reduction in the value of their assets. Their assets in this case had been channelled into their company. Thus, it is arguable that the diminution in the value of their shareholding is the measure of that loss. It may well be that when the evidence is heard it will be apparent that Mr and Mrs Christensen’s claim is inflated, but that is a matter for the trial. We are not prepared to hold at this stage that they do not have an arguable case to recover damages for the breach of an acknowledged duty.”
Thomas J
[1996] 1 NZLR 273
Cited – Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd (No 2) CA 1982
A plaintiff shareholder cannot recover damages merely because the company in which he has an interest has suffered damage. He cannot recover a sum equal to the diminution in the market value of his shares, or equal to the likely diminution in . .
Not followed – Johnson v Gore Wood and Co (a Firm) CA 12-Nov-1998
The claimant had previously issued a claim against the defendant solicitors through his company. He now sought to pursue a claim in his own name. It was resisted as an abuse of process, and on the basis that no personal duty of care was owed to the . .
Cited – Johnson v Gore Wood and Co HL 14-Dec-2000
Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses
A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter.
Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183149
(1989) 5 BCC 218
Cited – O’Neill and Another v Phillips and Others; In re a Company (No 00709 of 1992) HL 20-May-1999
The House considered a petition by a holder of 25 of the 100 issued shares in the company against the majority shareholder. The petitioner, an ex-employee, had been taken into management and then given his shares and permitted to take 50% of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.182840
The company in liquidation had sold machines on hire-purchase. It sued the finance company to recover hire-purchase agreements and other securities which it had charged to secure the repayment of advances. When the finance company relied upon the charge, the plaintiff replied that it was void because it should have been registered as a charge over book debts.
Held: If the property subject to a charge is not registered and the property remains after all the costs of the winding up and debts payable in the liquidation have been paid the property will continue to be encumbered even though the charge was not registered at Companies House. A book debt is one which could be properly entered in the books of the company whether in fact entered or not.
Buckley J
[1962] 1 WLR 974, [1962] 3 All ER 27
England and Wales
Cited – Smith (Administrator of Cosslett (Contractors) Limited) v Bridgend County Borough Council; In re Cosslett (Contractors) Ltd HL 8-Nov-2001
The standard building contract allowed a contractor to take plant and equipment from a site and sell it in payment of sums due under the contract, upon the other contractor becoming insolvent. It was said that this power amounted to a charge over . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.180667
The parties were members of a company which operated as a quasi-partnership. In discussions it had been agreed that the one third partners shuld be able to require the others to purchase his interest, but no contract was signed. On the claimant wanting to leave, the others appealed an order requiring them to purchase his share at full value.
Held: The Act was intended to protect shareholders from unfair treatment at the hands of other members, but it was not to be extended to require, in effect, a no-fault divorce procedure. The appeal was allowed.
Lord Justice Auld, Lord Justice Clarke, Lord Justice Jonathon Parker
Gazette 06-Feb-2003
England and Wales
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.178447
The deceased had made a gift of shares. She had executed a transfer, and acting upon the promise, the donee had agreed to become a director which he could only do if he also became a shareholder. The transfer was delivered to the deceased’s agent, but not to the company and was not registered.
Held: The Rose case did not mean that a transfer was incomplete without delivery to the registrar. The words of the section required only execution of a valid transfer. In the circumstances there had been an enforceable equitable assignment of the shares.
Lord Justice Schiemann, Lord Justice Clarke and Lady Justice Arden
Times 01-Apr-2002, Gazette 11-Apr-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 227, [2002] 1 WLR 2075, [2002] 2 BCLC 448, [2002] 4 All ER 215
England and Wales
Cited – In re Re Rose, Midland Bank Executor and Trustee Company Limited v Rose ChD 1949
The testator handed a transfer of the relevant shares to the donee, Mr Hook, together with the relevant certificates. The transfer had not been registered by the date of his death.
Held: Equity will not compel an imperfect gift to be . .
Cited – Milroy v Lord CA 26-Jul-1862
The donor executed a transfer of 50 shares. The shares were only transferable by entry in the books of the bank. No such transfer was ever made. The defendant had a power of attorney authorising him to transfer the donor’s shares and after the deed . .
Cited – Mascall v Mascall CA 13-Jun-1984
The question was whether a gift of land was completely constituted by delivery of the land certificate
Held: Equity will not come to the aid of a volunteer. Therefore, if a donee needs to get an order from a court of equity in order to . .
Cited – Warriner v Rogers 1800
(Year unknown) The donor wrote on pieces of paper that her servant was to have certain property on her death, but these documents did not amount to a valid will.
Held: The gift was imperfect as these documents did not constitute a valid . .
Cited – Jones v Lock 1865
A father put a cheque into the hands of his baby son of nine months saying ‘I give this to baby for himself’ and he then took back the cheque and put it away. The donor died and the cheque was found among his effects.
Held: There had been no . .
Cited – Richards v Delbridge CA 16-Apr-1874
The donor purported to make a voluntary gift of leasehold premises and stock in trade by endorsing on the lease ‘This deed and all thereto belonging I give to E from this time forth, and all the stock in trade.’ This document was delivered to E’s . .
Cited – Standing v Bowring CA 18-Dec-1885
The Plaintiff, a widow, in the year 1880, caused pounds 6000 Consols to be transferred into the joint names of herself and the Defendant, who was her godson. She did so with the express intention that the Defendant, in the event of his surviving . .
Cited – Nanney v Morgan 1888
A deed of transfer of shares did not pass the legal interest to the transferee until it was delivered to the secretary of the company. It was held that the transfer did not take effect until it had been left with the secretary and accepted by him. . .
Cited – In re Griffin 1899
The endorsement and delivery of a banker’s deposit receipt with the intention to make a gift operated as a good equitable assignment of the amount on deposit at the bank. The instruction had been handed to the donee. It did not matter that no notice . .
Cited – Macedo v Stroud PC 1922
(Trinidad) The donor purported to give real property (in part) by memorandum which was not registered. Under the law of Trinidad the transfer did not pass any estate or interest in the land. The donor delivered the instrument to his solicitor . .
Cited – In re Fry ChD 1946
A settlor executed a transfer of shares but failed to obtain the consent of the Treasury under the Regulations. The transferees argued that the testator had executed documents which were appropriate to the subject matter of the gift, namely the . .
Cited – In re Re Rose, Midland Bank Executor and Trustee Company Limited v Rose ChD 1949
The testator handed a transfer of the relevant shares to the donee, Mr Hook, together with the relevant certificates. The transfer had not been registered by the date of his death.
Held: Equity will not compel an imperfect gift to be . .
Cited – The Trustee of the Property of Jan Yngve Pehrsson, a bankrupt v Madeleine von Greyerz PC 16-Jun-1999
PC (Gibraltar) The mere appointment of trustees of shares without the delivery to the trustees of forms of transfer did not give rise to a trust.
Held: A gift was intended to take effect by a transfer of . .
See Also – Pennington and Another v Waine and others CA 17-Oct-2002
. .
Cited – Zeital and Another v Kaye and Others CA 5-Mar-2010
The deceased had held an apartment through beneficial interests in shares in a limited company. He died intestate. The parties disputed the ownership of the two shares. The company had been put into a members’ liquidation, and the company liquidator . .
See Also – Hurst v Crampton Bros (Coopers) Ltd and others CA 9-Aug-2002
Adjourned application for permission to appeal . .
See Also – Pennington and others v Crampton and others CA 17-Jun-2004
Application for permission to appeal against proposal of Tomlin Order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.167964
A claim against a company director which alleged a misapplication of company assets involving a fraudulent, or dishonest breach of trust, was not subject to a limitation period. A company was alleged to have fraudulently hidden certain profits. The section applied and there is no limitation period.
Mr Justice Rimer
Times 10-Dec-2001
England and Wales
Appeal from – 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 financial interest in a different company which had made loans to the claimant company. He replied that the claim was out of time. At first instance the . .
Cited – Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria SC 19-Feb-2014
Bank not liable for fraud of customer
The appellant sought to make the bank liable for a fraud committed by the Bank’s customer, the appellant saying that the Bank knew or ought to have known of the fraud. The court was asked whether a party liable only as a dishonest assistant was a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.166979
The defendant faced a claim for breach of warranties given by vendors in a company share sale agreement. The sought a contribution from the purchasers accountants who had prepared figures upon which the purchase decision was based. The defendants’ liability was strictly in contract, but the contribution they sought arose in negligence. The Act formulated the liability widely. However the damage arising from one claim, was not the same as the other, and no mutual discharge would apply. The request had been refused, and the defendant appealed.
Held: The judge had erred in holding that there would be no mutual discharge, and therefore the claim was capable of being subject to a claim for contribution. The fact that different sums might be payable did not mean that the claims were different. It was not correct to try to judge the issue of whether it would be just and equitable to make an order at an interlocutory stage.
Potter LJ and Longmore LJ
Gazette 08-Nov-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1446, [2002] 1 WLR 642
Civil Liability (Contributions) Act 1978
England and Wales
Cited – The Carnival 1994
. .
Cited – Friends’ Provident Life Office v Hillier, Parker May and Rowden CA 1997
Friends Provident had participated in a development project on terms which required it to pay its share of the development costs as it proceeded. It employed Hillier Parker, a firm of surveyors, to check demands made from time to time for payment of . .
Cited – Howkins and Harrison (A Firm) v Tyler and Another CA 3-Aug-2000
Having paid out andpound;400,000 to a lender as damages for a negligent survey valuation after default in repayments by the defendant, the claimant also sought to recover the payment from the defendant under the Act. The application to stay the . .
Cited – Charter Plc and Another v City Index Ltd and others ChD 12-Oct-2006
An employee of the claimant had fraudulently spent several million pounds of the claimant’s money on personal bets through the defendant company. The claimant said that the defendants knew the origin of the funds and were liable to repay them. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.166542
A party giving evidence to inspectors under the Companies Act was not in contempt for refusing to give a confidentiality undertaking. There is no power to require one, but the information was protectable as confidential in any event.
Gazette 08-Apr-1999
England and Wales
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.89856
Damages for misrepresentation due to share purchaser not due to him as member.
Times 27-May-1996
England and Wales
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.89384
Witness to Department of Trade and Industry on Company affairs to be given notice before evidence released.
Times 05-Jul-1996
Companies Act 1985 432, Insolvency Act 1986 236
England and Wales
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.89388
A company making a false statement on a bill of lading would be held liable for the tort of deceit when it knew that the bill must be relied upon by bankers and others making arrangements on its contents. A claimant ‘cannot recover for a loss avoidable by reasonable action on his own part because, if he could reasonably have avoided it, it will not be regarded as caused by the wrongdoer’.
ComC Presentation of documents under confirmed letter of credit – WCP 1983 Revision – Ante-dated and false bills of lading – Deceit – Causation – Mitigation.
Toulson J
Times 27-May-1998, [1999] 1 Lloyds Rep 747
England and Wales
See Also – Standard Chartered Bank v Pakistan National Shipping Corporation 1998
‘The tort of deceit involves a false representation made by the defendant, who knows it to be untrue, or who has no belief in its truth, or who is reckless as to its truth. If the defendant intended that the plaintiff should act in reliance on such . .
Cited – Sweetman v Nathan and others CA 25-Jul-2003
The claimant had been engaged with his solicitor in a fraudulent land transaction. He now sought to sue the solicitor for negligence. The solicitor replied that the claimant was unable to rely upon his own unlawful act to make a claim.
Held: . .
Cited – Veitch and Another v Avery CA 12-Jul-2007
The claimants appealed the award of only nominal damages after they succeeded in their claim against their solicitors for negligence in their conduct of the defence of a mortgage possession action.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge was . .
See Also – Standard Chartered Bank v Pakistan National Shipping Corporation, Standard Chartered Bank v Pakistan National Shipping Corporation and Others and Another and Others (Nos 2 and 4) HL 6-Nov-2002
Fraudulent Misrepresentation by Company Director
Fraudulent bills of lading had been issued in order to rely upon letters of credit issued by the bank. The director signing the bills sought to avoid personal liability, saying it was the Act of the company. The defendant company also appealed on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.89486
In the offence of fraudulent trading, ‘creditors’ are those to whom money was owed, including future creditors, not just those who can presently sue. Deceptions practised in UK, but having their effect abroad are prosecutable here. The only feature of the circumstances which had occurred outside England was the transfer of funds to the bank’s New York account. The court applied the comity rule to allow jurisdiction rather than the ‘last act’ rule. ‘In Sansom and others, 92 Cr App R 115, in a judgment delivered by Taylor LJ, Liangsiriprasert was applied by this court in a conspiracy case. We see no distinction, in relation to the principles of jurisdiction, between conspiracy and obtaining by deception. Accordingly the English court had jurisdiction [in this case].
Rose J, VP
Gazette 06-Dec-1995, Times 13-Nov-1995, Ind Summary 20-Nov-1995, [1996] 2 CAR 1, [1996] 2 Cr App R 1
Companies Act 1985 458, Theft Act 1968 15
England and Wales
See also – Regina v Smith, WD CACD 18-May-1999
The Court of Appeal Criminal Division has the discretion to adjourn an appeal, once it becomes clear that the point at issue was a point of law, which was itself the subject of a reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. . .
See also – Regina v Smith (Wallace Duncan) (No 3) CACD 28-Nov-2002
The appellant was supported in his appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. In addition the appellant sought to permission raise other grounds of appeal. The prosecution asserted that the court could filter the grounds of appeal already . .
Applied – Somchai Liangsiriprasert v Government of the United States of America PC 1991
(Hong Kong) Application was made for the defendant’s extradition from Hong Kong to the USA. The question was whether a conspiracy entered into outside Hong Kong with the intention of committing the criminal offence of trafficking in drugs in Hong . .
See Also – Regina v Smith, WD CACD 18-May-1999
The Court of Appeal Criminal Division has the discretion to adjourn an appeal, once it becomes clear that the point at issue was a point of law, which was itself the subject of a reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. . .
See Also – Regina v Smith (Wallace Duncan) (No 3) CACD 28-Nov-2002
The appellant was supported in his appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. In addition the appellant sought to permission raise other grounds of appeal. The prosecution asserted that the court could filter the grounds of appeal already . .
See also – Smith (Wallace Duncan), Regina v (No 4) CACD 17-Mar-2004
The defendant appealed convictions for fraudulent trading and obtaining property by deception, saying that the English court could not prosecute an offence committed principally in the US.
Held: Provided some substantial element (here the . .
Overruled – Regina v Manning CACD 24-Jun-1998
The defendant appealed his conviction for obtaining property by deception where part of the offence had taken place abroad.
Held: Smith should be overturned. The last act or terminatory theory remains the binding common law of England and . .
Cited – Purdy, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 30-Jul-2009
Need for Certainty in Scope of Offence
The appellant suffered a severe chronic illness and anticipated that she might want to go to Switzerland to commit suicide. She would need her husband to accompany her, and sought an order requiring the respondent to provide clear guidelines on the . .
Cited – Sheppard and Another, Regina v CACD 29-Jan-2010
The defendants appealed against their convictions for publishing racially inflammatory material. They skipped bail during the trial, were convicted in their absence, and returned after being refused asylum in the US. The convictions related to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.88051
A business expansion tax plan was valid if it was issued before the Income and Corporation Taxes Act. Shares were issued on the sending of the allotment letter, not when the shares came to be registered in the company’s books.
Ind Summary 30-Aug-1993, Times 06-Aug-1993
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 289 299A
England and Wales
Appealed to – National Westminster Bank Plc and Another v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 10-Jan-1994
Shares in Business Expansion Scheme were not to be treated as issued until they were entered in the company’s share register. The scheme was ineffective being a scheme to avoid Income Tax by financial manipulation. . .
Appeal from – National Westminster Bank Plc and Another v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 10-Jan-1994
Shares in Business Expansion Scheme were not to be treated as issued until they were entered in the company’s share register. The scheme was ineffective being a scheme to avoid Income Tax by financial manipulation. . .
At First Instance – National Westminster Bank Plc and Another v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 24-Jun-1994
Shares are allotted to a person when that person acquires an unconditional right to be entered on a company’s register of members. The issue of shares only becomes complete after they are registered in the company’s books for the purposes of the BES . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.84210
There had been no unlawful distribution under a shareholders’ agreement where quasi-partners were given a share of future earnings for contracts initiated by them before retirement in proportion to previous stake in the company. A director ought to be relieved against a failure to declare an interest in a contract where: ‘No amount of formal disclosure by each to the other would have increased the other’s relevant knowledge.’
Ferris J
Times 01-Mar-1999, [1999] 2 BCLC 203
England and Wales
Cited – Ultraframe (UK) Ltd v Fielding and others ChD 27-Jul-2005
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.83290
The court considered the requirement on a partner to retire under a ‘just and reasonable’ provision: ‘All that Hinds has done in the past in exercise of his control has been within his legal powers. The question is whether he has used those powers in such a way as to make it just and equitable that Robertson should be allowed by the court to retire from the partnership. The analogy of a partnership seems to me to clarify discussion.’
Mann CJ
[1942] VLR 222
Approved – Ebrahimi v Westbourne Galleries Ltd and Others (on Appeal from In Re Westbourne Galleries Ltd) HL 3-May-1972
Unfair Prejudice to Minority Shareholder
A company had operated effectively as a partnership between two and then three directors. No dividends had been paid, but the directors had received salaries. One director was removed and sought an order for the other to purchase his shares, or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.182290
The bankrupt had been a member of the Bombay stock exchange. His share had been forfeit. The trustee claimed the share. The official assignee contended that his members card or the value thereof vested in him as the assignee in the insolvency, because among other reasons, ‘if the effect of the rules be that the proceeds of sale of the insolvent’s card do not enure for the benefit of the general body of his creditors the rules are contrary to the law of insolvency.’
Held: The nature of the constitution of the association as regulated by the deed of association and its rules in the case of a defaulting member who was expelled from the Association, no interest in his card was retained and there was nothing to pass to the assignee.
Lord Blanesburgh said: ‘It being agreed . . that the rules of this association are entirely innocent of any design to evade the law of insolvency, it may be that even these cases, although cases of a company and a partnership, are more favourable to the [association] than to the [official assignee] . . [T]he real answer to this contention of the [official assignee] [is] in the nature and character of the association as they have described it whereby in the case of a defaulting member who is expelled from the association no interest in his card remains in himself, and none can pass to his assignee, whether his expulsion does or does not take place before the commencement of his insolvency.’
Lord Blanesburgh
(1932) 48 TLR 443 PC
England and Wales
Cited – Money Markets International Stockbrokers Ltd v London Stock Exchange Ltd and Another ChD 10-Jul-2001
MMI were members of the London Stock Exchange, and accordingly held one share in that non-profit making institution. The share was valueless. Anticipating losing their membership and so the share, and also the demutualisation, the share was to be . .
Cited – Belmont Park Investments Pty Ltd v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd and Another SC 27-Jul-2011
Complex financial instruments insured the indebtedness of Lehman Brothers. On that company’s insolvency a claim was made. It was said that provisions in the documents offended the rule against the anti-deprivation rule. The courts below had upheld . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.180973
The section gave five grounds upon which a company may be wound up and a ‘just and equitable’ ground.
Held: the latter was not to be construed restrictively by ejusdem generis with the other grounds. A company could be wound up if a considerable proportion of the shareholders had a proper lack of confidence in the directors, and the directors had a preponderance of effective power.
Shaw L said that a company may be wound up on the just and equitable ground where there is ‘a justifiable lack of confidence in the conduct and management of the company’s affairs’ and thus a risk to the public interest that warrants protection
Shaw L
[1924] AC 783, 93 LJPC 257, [1924] BandCR 209, 131 LT 719, 68 SJ 735, 40 TLR 732
Commonwealth
Approved – Ebrahimi v Westbourne Galleries Ltd and Others (on Appeal from In Re Westbourne Galleries Ltd) HL 3-May-1972
Unfair Prejudice to Minority Shareholder
A company had operated effectively as a partnership between two and then three directors. No dividends had been paid, but the directors had received salaries. One director was removed and sought an order for the other to purchase his shares, or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.180915
The claimant sought payment of fees said to be due to him as director of a development company.
Foskett J
[2011] EWHC 354 (QB)
England and Wales
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.430250
Lord Justice Newey, Lady Justice Asplin and Lady Justice Rose
[2019] EWCA Civ 1610, [2020] 1 CMLR 32, [2019] STI 1650, [2019] STC 2146, [2020] 1 WLR 777, [2020] 2 All ER 756, [2019] BTC 25
England and Wales
Appeal from – Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Trustees Ltd v Revenue and Customs UTTC 16-May-2018
INCOME TAX – pension fund lending overseas shares under stock lending arrangements – ICTA 1988, Sch 23A – manufactured overseas dividends (‘MODs’) representative of dividends on overseas shares – whether a difference in UK tax treatment between MODs . .
Appeal from – Revenue and Customs v Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Trustees Ltd SC 27-Apr-2022
The Respondent is the trustee of the British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme, a registered pension fund holding a large portfolio of shares in UK and overseas companies. Between 2002 and 2008, the pension fund undertook a large number of ‘stock . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.641804
In the course of a contested take-over bid, the directors of the target company who owned a majority of the company’s voting shares were alleged, in breach of their duties both to the company and to its shareholders, to have accepted proposals which would reduce the value of the company’s assets and hence of its shares and induce the shareholders to accept the lower of two rival offers.
Held: A breach of a director’s fiduciary duties may cause loss to the shareholders because: ‘they are deprived of the opportunity of realising their shares to greater advantage’. Foss v. Harbottle has nothing whatever to do with a shareholder’s right of action for a direct loss caused to his own pocket as distinct from a loss caused to the coffers of a company in which he holds shares. The case occurred where, as a result of the breach of the duty of care on the part of directors to advise their shareholders in relation to a prospective takeover bid, the plaintiff (and other shareholders) was induced or compelled to dispose of his shares to a bidder at an under-value. The wrong is done not to the company, but the shareholders. Its assets are not depleted; its coffers remain unaffected. The court distinguished the facts on the bais that the reckless decision of the directors, if implemented, will cause losses in two directions. The company in question will suffer a loss to the extent that its shares in a subsidiary are depreciated in value. That is a loss exclusively to the coffers of ACC. It is not a loss to the pockets of the shareholders in ACC, although it might, in theory, cause the market value of ACC shares to fall. No shareholder in ACC could sue the directors for a diminution in the value. In this case, however the loss which would be suffered is the loss to the pockets of the shareholders because they are deprived of the opportunity of realising their shares to greater advantage. That is a loss suffered exclusively to the pockets of the shareholders, and is in no sense a loss to the coffers of the company, which remain totally unaffected.
Lawton LJ
[1983] BCLC 244
England and Wales
Cited – Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd (No 2) CA 1982
A plaintiff shareholder cannot recover damages merely because the company in which he has an interest has suffered damage. He cannot recover a sum equal to the diminution in the market value of his shares, or equal to the likely diminution in . .
Cited – Stein v Blake and others CA 13-Oct-1997
The defendants challenged leave to appeal given to the plaintiff against dismissal of his claim following the Prudential Assurance case.
Held: The issue was whether the plaintiff can recover the loss which he has allegedly sustained by reason . .
Cited – Johnson v Gore Wood and Co HL 14-Dec-2000
Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses
A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter.
Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.180877
Tom Leech QC (sitting as a Judge of the Chancery Division)
[2020] EWHC 2861 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.655610
Application brought by Wow Internet Limited acting by its Liquidator seeking the recovery of various sums, which the Applicants assert were wrongfully withdrawn by the Respondent in his capacity as the sole director of the Company, from its bank account in breach of his statutory and fiduciary duties.
Deputy Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Frith
[2020] EWHC 2890 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.655609
David Cooke HHJ
[2020] EWHC 3088 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.655956
The articles of association said that general meetings were to be held once a year and that at the ordinary meeting in 1906, all directors should retire from office. . Articles 62, 101, 104 and 106 of the articles of association of the company provided:
’62. General meetings shall be held once in every year,
such time and place in England or in France as may be prescribed by the directors .
101. At the ordinary meeting in 1906 all the directors, and at the ordinary meeting in every subsequent year one-third of all the directors for the time being respectively, or if their number is not a multiple of three, then the number nearest to one-third, but not exceeding one-third, shall retire from office. A retiring director shall retain office until the dissolution of the meeting at which his successor is elected.
104. The company shall, at the meeting at which any directors retire in manner aforesaid, fill up the vacated office of each director by electing a person thereto, and without notice in that behalf may fill up any other vacancies, unless the meeting determine not to fill up such vacancies.
106. If at any meeting at which an election of directors ought to take place the places of the retiring directors, or some of them, are not filled up, the retiring directors, or such of them as have not had their places filled up, shall, if duly qualified, be deemed to have been re-elected, unless the meeting determine not to fill up such vacancies.’
The articles also provided for certain remuneration to the directors. No general meeting was held in 1906 or 1907, but the directors continued to act as such. The company was wound up in October 1910. The directors submitted proofs for their remuneration. The liquidator rejected the proofs wholly or in part on, inter alia, the ground that the directors should have retired under the Article 101 in 1906, and that it was their own fault that no general meeting was called in 1906 or 1907.
Held: The objection succeeded.
Sargant J said:
‘As to the two other directors, Steel and Phillips, there is another objection. By clause 62 of the articles of association and by statute (s. 49 of the Companies Act, 1862) the directors were bound to summon a general meeting of the company once in every calendar year, and article 101 provided that ‘At the ordinary meeting in 1906 all the directors . . shall retire from office.’ No ordinary meeting was held or called in 1906 or 1907, and the liquidator’s contention is that all the directors vacated office on December 31, 1906, which was the last day on which a meeting of the company for that year could have been held. That contention appears to me to be well founded.
A director on his appointment does not ordinarily step into an office which is perpetual unless terminated by some act, but into an office the holding of which is limited by the terms of the articles. The meaning of article 101 is that the holding of the office of director was only to last until the end of 1906, or until the earlier date on which the ordinary meeting for that year was held. In re Great Northern Salt and Chemical Works is merely a decision as to the construction to be placed on clause 62 of Table A to the Act of 1862. Moreover, article 106 in the present case shews that prima facie a retiring director vacated office, and is against the applicants’ contention. The duty of the directors was to call a meeting in 1906 and 1907, and they cannot take advantage of their own default in that respect and say that they still remain directors. Park v. Lawton is to some extent in point. There it was decided that the fact that no general meeting had been held in a year was no defence to a charge of not sending in certain returns required to be made within a certain time after the first or only general meeting in the year.’
Sargant J
[1914] 1 Ch 883
England and Wales
Cited – Re New Cedos Engineering Company Ltd 1994
The company had two directors. On a death the inheritor of a members shares were entitled to have their shares registered. The majority shareholder died. The remaining board refused to register his widow as owner of the shares. She remarried, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.634365
Allegation of unfairly prejudicial actions by directors
HH Judge Eyre QC
[2019] EWHC 115 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.633427
A partnership contract between A and B, two dentists, provided that if either should ‘be guilty of professional misconduct or any act which is calculated to bring discredit upon or injure the other partner or the partnership business,’ the other should have the right to terminate the partnership. A joined with other persons in forming, and became a director and shareholder in, a company called the American Dental Institute, Limited. This company issued large numbers of advertisements, in which they praised their own work and products in the most extravagant terms, and at the same time decried those of rival practitioners in general, against whom they also made charges of moral misconduct.
Held that A’s conduct was such as to entitle B to terminate the partnership under the clause above narrated.
Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), The Earl of Halsbury, Lords Macnaghten and Atkinson
[1907] UKHL 966, 45 SLR 966
England and Wales
Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.622314
A railway company started a service of omnibuses from their station to and through a town. The omnibuses ran in connection with trains, but carried ordinary passengers for any distances. They had no special powers in their Act.
Held that the omnibus business as carried on by the company was not incidental to the undertaking of the railway, and accordingly was ultra vires.
Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lord Ashbourne, Lord Macnaghten, Lord James of Hereford, and Lord Atkinson
[1907] UKHL 631, 45 SLR 631
England and Wales
Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.622299
Wherever a company has passed a special resolution for reducing its capital the Court has jurisdiction to entertain a petition at the instance of the company, for an order confirming such reduction. There are no other conditions-precedent to such jurisdiction, and, in particular, it need not be proved that the capital which is to be cancelled is lost or unrepresented by available assets. The petition will be granted by the Court if the interests of creditors are properly safeguarded, and if the proposed reduction is a prudent and business like measure, not unfair to any shareholder, or detrimental to the public.
Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Macnaghten, Robertson, and Atkinson
[1907] UKHL 616, 45 SLR 616
England and Wales
Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.622293
A company with an issue of debenture stock already in existence re-arranged the stock and modified the rights of the holders under the authority of a private Act. The stock was divided into two new classes, ‘A’ and ‘B,’ and existing stock-holders obtained certificates for a quantity of each class, proportionate to their original holdings, upon delivering up the old certificates.
Held that this amounted to an issue of debenture stock under the Finance Act 1899, sec. 8, and that the company was bound to deliver a statement thereof bearing the appropriate stamp-duty
Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Ashbourne, Macnaghten, James of Hereford, and Atkinson
[1908] UKHL 682
England and Wales
Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621510
The deed of settlement of an insurance company founded in 1854 provided that its profits were to be divided as directed by its bye-laws, and that its bye-laws could be altered by other byelaws.
In 1886 the bye-laws provided that the whole profits made in the mutual branch were to be divided among the policy-holders in that branch. In that year the company issued to the respondent a policy entitling him to pounds 400 on death, and ‘all such other sums, if any, as the said company by their directors may have ordered to he added to such amount by way of bonus or otherwise according to their practice for the time.’ There was nothing further in the policy or the proposal which could be construed into a contract by the assurance company to pay anything beyond the pounds 400, and the respondent’s proposal for insurance was made on a form in which he expressly agreed to ‘conform to and abide by the deed of settlement and bye-laws, rules, and regulations of the company in all respects.’ The respondent, however, had taken his policy relying upon a prospectus issued by the company, which stated:-‘The entire profits made by the company in the mutual department, after deducting the expenses, are divided among the policy-holders without any deduction for a reserve fund.’ In 1902 the assurance company proposed under the Companies Act 1890 to alter its constitution by becoming registered as a company with limited liability, with a memorandum and articles of association which provided that 5 per cent. of the profits of the mutual department were to be carried to a reserve fund. The proposed change was perfectly competent, looking to the constitution of the company as set forth in the original deed of settlement.
Held that the company had not contracted with the respondent that the whole of the profits of the mutual department should be divided among the policy–holders in that department. Judgment of Court of Appeal reversed.
Lords Macnaghten, Robertson, and Lindley
[1905] UKHL 578
England and Wales
Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621196
Section 38 of the Companies Act 1867 provides that every prospectus of a company shall specify certain particulars of any contract entered into by the company before the issue of the prospectus, and that any prospectus which does not do so ‘shall be deemed fraudulent’ on the part of the directors ‘knowingly issuing the same as regards any person taking shares in the company on the faith of such prospectus, unless he shall have had notice of such contract.’
In an action for damages for fraud brought against the directors of a company who had issued a fraudulent certificate within the meaning of the above section, by a person who had taken shares on the faith of the certificate, held (1) that to succeed he must prove (a) that had he known of the omitted contract he would not have become a shareholder; (6) that he had suffered damage; (2) that the omission having been due to an innocent mistake of the directors they were in any case protected by a clause of waiver waiving any fuller compliance with sec. 38 than that contained in the prospectus.
Per Lord Lindley-‘The language of the statute in terms applies to directors and others who knowingly issue a prospectus which does not disclose such a contract as is mentioned in the first part of the section, whether they knew of its existence or not. But it can hardly be supposed that the Legislature meant to brand with fraud a director who knowingly issued a prospectus but never knew of the existence of a contract which ought to have been disclosed. I cannot, however, think that the section can be properly restricted so as not to apply to a director who knew of a contract such as is described in the first part of the section but forgot all about it when he issued a prospectus not referring to it.’
Lord Chancellor (Halsbury), Lords Robertson and Lindley
[1905] UKHL 581, 43 SLR 581
England and Wales
Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621197
A coal merchant, engaged both in the home and foreign trade, sold his home business to a company, entering at the same time into an agreement with the company not to ‘directly or indirectly carry on, or be engaged, or concerned, or interested in the coal trade in any part of Great Britain or the Isle of Man.’ He subsequently sold his foreign business to another company on credit, looking for payment to the company’s future profits. The company subsequently started a home business in Great Britain.
Held that the mere fact of his being a creditor of the company did not make him ‘concerned or interested in’ the coal trade in the meaning of the agreement.
This was an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal (Williams, Stirling, and Cozens-Hardy, L.JJ.), who had affirmed a judgment of Joyce, J. The facts were as follows:- The respondent Harrison carried on business as a coal merchant, being engaged both in the home trade and also in an export trade. He sold his home trade to the appellants, who were also coal merchants, retaining the export trade, and entered into a covenant not to ‘directly or indirectly carry on, or be engaged, or concerned, or interested in the coal trade in any part of Great Britain or the Isle of Man.’ He afterwards sold his export trade to a company. The sale was not for cash, and he looked to the profits of the company’s trade for payment of the purchase money. The company afterwards began to carry on a home trade, and the appellants brought this action for breach of covenant, asserting that the respondent Harrison was ‘concerned or interested in’ the company’s coal trade in Great Britain.
Joyce, J., and the Court of Appeal gave judgment for the defenders. The pursuers appealed to the House of Lords.
At the conclusion of the argument for the appellants their Lordships gave judgment.
[1905] UKHL 571, 43 SLR 571
England and Wales
Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621194
The Special Act of a gas company provided that the profits of the company to be divided among the ordinary shareholders in any year should not exceed a specified rate.
Held that in calculating the rate of dividend income tax ought to be included.
Lord Chancellor (Halsbury), Lords Robertson and Lindley
[1905] UKHL 567, 43 SLR 567
England and Wales
Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621192
Hildyard J
[2018] EWHC 1980 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621070
Henry Carr J
[2018] EWHC 1936 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621080
Where there was a clause in a contract of partnership between house agents prohibiting an outgoing partner from carrying on or engaging or being interested in a similar business within a given area, held that an outgoing partner could be restrained from advertising houses to be let within the area although his place of business was outside.
Lords Dunedin, Atkinson, Shaw, Sumner, and Parmoor
[1914] UKHL 647, 52 SLR 647
England and Wales
Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.620719
The articles of association of a one-ship company, article 37, provided: ‘The partners for the time being of Babtie and Company of Glasgow shall be the first managers of the company. . . ‘ Held (rev. judgment of the First Division) that the individuals who were partners of Babtie and Company at the time when the company was incorporated remained managers till death, resignation, disqualification, or removal, quite irrespective of any changes in the constitution of Babtie and Company.
Lord Dunedin, Lord Atkinson, Lord Shaw, Lord Parmoor, and Lord Wrenbury
[1915] UKHL 849, 52 SLR 849
Scotland
Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.620690
[2018] EWCA Civ 1793
England and Wales
Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620455
The parties disputed the beneficial ownership of the shares in a company holding title to a property occupied by the defendants.
Amanda Tipples QC
[2018] EWHC 1832 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620095
Claim by liquidators for several liquidated companies against their former director for compensation for breach of trust or breach of fiduciary duty. It was said that she had diverted various assets to her own use.
Fancourt J
[2018] EWHC 1781 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619889
The Friendly Societies Act 1896, section 68 (1), enacts – ‘Every dispute between a member . . and the society or branch, or an officer thereof, . . shall be decided in manner directed by the rules of the society or branch, and the decision so given shall be binding and conclusive on all parties without appeal, and shall not be removeable into any court of law or restrainable by injunction, and application for the enforcement thereof may be made to the County Court.’
The appellant was a member of a friendly society and had a dispute with them as to his right to sick pay. The arbitration committee decided against his claim. The appellant appealed successively to the executive committee and the district arbitration committee of the head district, who also disallowed his claim, and under the rules ordered him to pay the costs. He refused to pay, and on the expiry of a year he was suspended and then expelled, all in accordance with the rules. He brought an action against the society for injunction and damages.
Held that the proceedings of the society complained of were not ultra vires, and being in accordance with the rules of the society were not within the jurisdiction of a court of law.
Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Atkinson and Mersey
[1910] UKHL 907, 47 SLR 907
England and Wales
Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619786
A company raised capital upon pounds 10 bonds which were declared to be repayable, together with pounds 25 bonus, out of future net profits of the company. No profits were obtained. It was afterwards agreed with the bondholders that the claim to the bonus should be extinguished by the allotment of twenty pounds 1 shares, considered to be fully paid up, in respect of each bond. Held that, the charge being exclusively upon income, the issue of shares was ultra vires as being an issue of capital without payment in money’s worth.
Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Macnaghten, Ashbourne, Collins, and Shaw
[1910] UKHL 696, 48 SLR 696
England and Wales
Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619792
Loan – Burgh – Statute – ‘Redeemable’ Stock
The Lord Chancellor (Haldane), Earl of Halsbury, Lord Atkinson, Lord Shaw
[1912] UKHL 31
Scotland
Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619254
Widow of deceased member of trade union brought action against a trade union to recover sums due to her husband under rules of the association.
Held that section 4 of Trade Union Act 1871 excluded action except at common law, and that at common law action was barred by the fact that this trade union was at common law an illegal association owing to its rules being in restraint of trade.
Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Macnaghten, Atkinson, Shaw, Mersey, and Robson
[1912] UKHL 1026, 49 SLR 1026
England and Wales
Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619231
(New Zealand) The New Zealand statute required a holder of specified investments to give notice of its holding to a regulator as soon as it became aware of its holding. Unbeknown to any others in the company apart from one colleague, its chief investment officer improperly acquired such investments on the company’s behalf. The former managing director of Meridian used the company’s funds to make it a substantial security holder but neither he nor anyone else gave the requisite statutory notice requiring every person who became a ‘substantial security holder’ to give notice of his interest both to the company and to the Stock Exchange as soon as he knew he was a substantial security holder. The question was whether his acts or omissions were the acts or omission of the company so as to render the company liable to the statutory penalties.
Held: The company was liable. It was a matter of construction in each situation to decide whether an employee’s knowledge is to be imputed to his employer. It might be so imputed where this was necessary to make legislation effective.
Lord Hoffmann said that the rules for attributing the acts of a director to the company are primarily in its constitution, but ‘These primary rules of attribution are obviously not enough to enable a company to go out into the world and do business. Not every act on behalf of the company could be expected to be the subject of a resolution of the board or a unanimous decision of the shareholders. The company therefore builds upon the primary rules of attribution by using general rules of attribution which are equally available to natural persons, namely, the principles of agency. It will appoint servants and agents whose acts, by a combination of the general principles of agency and the company’s primary rules of attribution, count as the acts of the company. And having done so, it will also make itself subject to the general rules by which liability for the acts of others can be attributed to natural persons, such as estoppel or ostensible authority in contract and vicarious liability or tort.
It is worth pausing at this stage to make what may seem an obvious point. Any statement about what a company has or has not done, or can or cannot do, is necessarily a reference to the rules of attribution (primary and general) as they apply to that company. Judges sometimes say that a company ‘as such’ cannot do anything; it must act by servants or agents. This may seem an unexceptionable, even banal remark. And of course the meaning is usually perfectly clear. But a reference to a company ‘as such’ might suggest that there is something out there called the company of which one can meaningfully say that it can or cannot do something. There is in fact no such thing as the company as such, no ding an sich, only the applicable rules. To say that a company cannot do something means only that there is no one whose doing of that act would, under the applicable rules of attribution, count as an act of the company.
The company’s primary rules of attribution together with the general principles of agency, vicarious liability and so forth are usually sufficient to enable one to determine its rights and obligations. In exceptional cases, however, they will not provide an answer. This will be the case when a rule of law, either expressly or by implication, excludes attribution on the basis of the general principles of agency or vicarious liability. For example, a rule may be stated in language primarily applicable to a natural person and require some act or state of mind on the part of that person ‘himself’ as opposed to his servants or agents. This is generally true of rules of the criminal law, which ordinarily impose liability only for the actus reus and mens rea of the defendant himself. How is such a rule to be applied to a company?
One possibility is that the court may come to the conclusion that the rule was not intended to apply to companies at all; for example, a law which created an offence for which the only penalty was community service. Another possibility is that the court might interpret the law as meaning that it could apply to a company only on the basis of its primary rules of attribution, i.e. if the act giving rise to liability was specifically authorised by a resolution of the board or an unanimous agreement of the shareholders. But there will be many cases in which neither of these solutions is satisfactory; in which the court considers that the law was intended to apply to companies and that, although it excludes ordinary vicarious liability, insistence on the primary rules of attribution would in practice defeat that intention. In such a case, the court must fashion a special rule of attribution for the particular substantive rule. This is always a matter of interpretation: given that it was intended to apply to a company, how was it intended to apply? Whose act (or knowledge, or state of mind) was for this purpose intended to count as the act etc. of the company? One finds the answer to this question by applying the usual canons of interpretation, taking into account the language of the rule (if it is a statute) and its content and policy.’
Lord Hoffmann: ‘. . . their Lordships would wish to guard themselves against being understood to mean that whenever a servant of a company has authority to do an act on its behalf, knowledge of that act will for all purposes be attributed to the company. It is a question of construction in each case as to whether the particular rule requires that the knowledge that an act has been done, or the state of mind with which it was done, should be attributed to the company. Sometimes, as in In re Supply of Ready Mixed Concrete (No. 2) [1995] 1 A.C. 456 and this case, it will be appropriate . . .. On the other hand, the fact that a company’s employee is authorised to drive a lorry does not in itself lead to the conclusion that if he kills someone by reckless driving, the company will be guilty of manslaughter. There is no inconsistency. Each is an example of an attribution rule for a particular purpose, tailored as it always must be to the terms and policies of the substantive rule.’
Lord Hoffmann, Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Jauncev of Tullichettle, Lord Mustill, Lord Lloyd of Berwick
Gazette 19-Jul-1995, Times 29-Jun-1995, [1995] 2 AC 500, [1995] BCC 942, [1995] 3 All ER 918, [1995] UKPC 5, [1995] 3 WLR 413, [1995] 2 BCLC 116
England and Wales
Cited – Crown Dilmun, Dilmun Investments Limited v Nicholas Sutton, Fulham River Projects Limited ChD 23-Jan-2004
There was a contract for the sale of Craven Cottage football stadium, conditional upon the grant of non-onerous planning permissions. It was claimed that the contract had been obtained by the defendant employee in breach of his fiduciary duties to . .
Cited – Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust CA 16-Mar-2005
The claimant had sought damages against his employer, saying that they had failed in their duty to him under the 1997 Act in failing to prevent harassment by a manager. He appealed a strike out of his claim.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The . .
Cited – KR and others v Royal and Sun Alliance Plc CA 3-Nov-2006
The insurer appealed findings of liability under the 1930 Act. Claims had been made for damages for child abuse in a residential home, whom they insured. The home had become insolvent, and the claimants had pursued the insurer.
Held: The . .
Cited – Moore Stephens (A Firm) v Stone Rolls Ltd (in liquidation) HL 30-Jul-2009
The appellants had audited the books of the respondent company, but had failed to identify substantial frauds by an employee of the respondent. The auditors appealed a finding of professional negligence, relying on the maxim ex turpi causa non . .
Cited – Ferguson v British Gas Trading Ltd CA 10-Feb-2009
Harassment to Criminal Level needed to Convict
The claimant had been a customer of the defendant, but had moved to another supplier. She was then subjected to a constant stream of threatening letters which she could not stop despite re-assurances and complaints. The defendant now appealed . .
Cited – Orr v Milton Keynes Council CA 1-Feb-2011
The employee was involved in offensive and insubordinate behaviour with his team leader. He was dismissed by a more senior manager, after a hearing in which the first manager gave evidence but which the claimant did not attend. It was later shown . .
Cited – Reilly v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council SC 14-Mar-2018
Burchell case remains good law
The appellant head teacher had been dismissed for failing to disclose the fact that her partner had been convicted of a sex offence. She now appealed from rejection of her claim for unfair dismissal.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The . .
Cited – Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti SC 27-Nov-2019
‘if a person in the hierarchy of responsibility above the employee determines that she (or he) should be dismissed for a reason but hides it behind an invented reason which the decision-maker adopts, the reason for the dismissal is the hidden reason . .
Cited – Singularis Holdings Ltd v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd SC 30-Oct-2019
The Court was asked whether a claim against a bank for breach of the Quincecare duty is defeated if the customer is a company, and the fraudulent payment instructions are given by the company’s Chairman and sole shareholder who is the dominating . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.83660
Mr Salomon had incorporated his long standing personal business of shoe manufacture into a limited company. He held nearly all the shares, and had received debentures on the transfer into the company of his former business. The business failed, and a subsequent debenture holder now said that the sums paid by the company for the business were too high.
Held: The company had been properly incorporated, and it was not for the court to speculate as to the motives and exhorbitance of the incorporation. The fact that the shares were nearly all owned by one person made no difference. A company and the person or persons constituting its directing mind are two or more separate persons in law. From the date of incorporation a limited company becomes a legal person with the rights and duties distinct from those of the members and shareholders. There is a corporate veil between them, though this might be lifted or pierced in an extraordinary case.
‘The intention of the legislature’ is a common but very slippery phrase, which, popularly understood, may signify anything from intention embodied in positive enactment to speculative opinion as to what the legislature probably would have meant, although there has been an omission to enact it.
Lord MacNaghten said: ‘For such a catastrophe as has occurred in this case some would blame the law that allows the creation of a floating charge. But a floating charge is too convenient a form of security to be lightly abolished. I have long thought, and I believe some of your Lordships also think, that the ordinary trade creditors of a trading company ought to have a preferential claim on the assets in liquidation in respect of debts incurred within a certain limited time before the winding-up. But that is not the law at present. Everybody knows that when there is a winding-up debenture-holders generally step in and sweep off everything; and a great scandal it is.’
Lord Davey said that a company is bound in a matter intra vires by the unanimous agreement of its members.
Lord Halsbury LC said: ‘it seems to me impossible to dispute that once the company is legally incorporated it must be treated like any other independent person with its rights and liabilities appropriate to itself, and that the motives of those who took part in the promotion of the company are absolutely irrelevant in discussing what those rights and liabilities are.’
Lord Herschell said: ‘It was said that in the present case the six shareholders other than the appellant were mere dummies, his nominees, and held their shares in trust for him. I will assume that this was so. In my opinion, it makes no difference. The statute forbids the entry in the register of any trust; and it certainly contains no enactment that each of the seven persons subscribing the memorandum must be beneficially entitled to the share or shares for which he subscribes. The persons who subscribe the memorandum, or who have agreed to become members of the company and whose names are on the register, are alone regarded as, and in fact are, the shareholders . . Whether they are beneficial owners or bare trustees is a matter with which neither the company nor creditors have anything to do: it concerns only them and their cestuis que trust if they have any.’
Lord MacNaghten, Lord Watson, Lord Davey
[1897] AC 22, 66 LJCh 35, [1895-99] All ER 33
England and Wales
Cited – Carlton Communications Plc, Granada Media Plc v The Football League ComC 1-Aug-2002
The applicants sought a declaration that they had not provided guarantees to support a contract between a joint venture company owned by them, OnDigital, and the respondent to screen football matches. The company had become insolvent.
Held: . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Gomez HL 3-Dec-1992
The defendant worked as a shop assistant. He had persuaded the manager to accept in payment for goods, two cheques which he knew to be stolen. The CA had decided that since the ownership of the goods was transferred on the sale, no appropriation of . .
Cited – Regina v Z (Attorney General for Northern Ireland’s Reference) HL 19-May-2005
The defendants appealed their convictions for being members of proscribed organisations. They were members of the ‘Real IRA’, but only the IRA was actually proscribed.
Held: The appeals failed. In construing an Act of Parliament it may be of . .
Cited – National Westminster Bank plc v Spectrum Plus Limited and others HL 30-Jun-2005
Former HL decision in Siebe Gorman overruled
The company had become insolvent. The bank had a debenture and claimed that its charge over the book debts had become a fixed charge. The preferential creditors said that the charge was a floating charge and that they took priority.
Held: The . .
Cited – Holland v Revenue and Customs and Another CA 2-Jul-2009
The appellant supported IT workers. Through his own company, he set up companies in which his company was a director, and which companies in turn employed the IT workers securing substantial savings in higher rate Corporation Tax.
Held: The . .
Cited – Holland v Revenue and Customs and Another SC 24-Nov-2010
The Revenue sought an order under section 212 of the 1986 Act, for payment of the tax debts of the insolvent company by a de facto director. H had organised a scheme under which IT contractors had worked through companies created by him under a . .
Cited – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate SC 12-Dec-2012
The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject . .
Cited – Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others SC 12-Jun-2013
In the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce, questions arose regarding company assets owned by the husband. The court was asked as to the power of the court to order the transfer of assets owned entirely in the company’s names. The . .
Cited – Petrodel Resources Ltd and Others v Prest and Others CA 26-Oct-2012
The parties had disputed ancillary relief on their divorce. The three companies, each in the substantial ownership of the husband, challenged the orders made against them saying there was no jurisdiction to order their property to be conveyed to the . .
Cited – Jetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others CA 31-Jul-2013
Defendants appealed against refusal of their request for a summary striking out for lack of jurisdiction, of the claims against them arising from their management of the insolvency of the first defendant. . .
Cited – Jetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others SC 22-Apr-2015
The liquidators of Bilta had brought proceedings against former directors and the appellant alleging that they were party to an unlawful means conspiracy which had damaged the company by engaging in a carousel fraud with carbon credits. On the . .
Cited – Lee v Lee’s Air Farming Limited PC 11-Oct-1960
Mr Lee had formed a company, Lee’s Air Farming Limited and held nearly all its shares. He was the managing director, but by profession a pilot. The company was formed to conduct an aerial top-dressing business. He appointed himself the chief pilot . .
Cited – Williams and Another v Natural Life Health Foods Ltd and Another HL 30-Apr-1998
A company director was not personally reliable in negligence for bad advice given by him as director unless it could clearly be shown that he had willingly accepted such personal responsibility. A special relationship involving an assumption of . .
Cited – Ben Hashem v Ali Shayif and Another FD 22-Sep-2008
The court was asked to pierce the veil of incorporation of a company in the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce. H had failed to co-operate with the court.
After a comprehensive review of all the authorities, Munby J said: ‘The . .
Cited – Singularis Holdings Ltd v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd SC 30-Oct-2019
The Court was asked whether a claim against a bank for breach of the Quincecare duty is defeated if the customer is a company, and the fraudulent payment instructions are given by the company’s Chairman and sole shareholder who is the dominating . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.182823
[2018] EWHC 1562 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.618981
[2018] EWHC 1331 (Ch)
Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986
England and Wales
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.618826
Claim made by application notice by the liquidators of Laishley Limited the respondent, managing director for equitable compensation in respect of alleged breaches of fiduciary duty in executing two deeds of release on behalf of the company in relation to building contracts.
[2018] EWHC 1499 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.618829
Post judgment orders
[2018] EWHC 1445 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.618822
[2018] EWHC 1509 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.618788
beneficial ownership of shares in a company
Norris J
[2018] EWHC 1490 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.618787
[2018] EWHC 1489 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.618778
Rectification of company registers
[2018] WLR(D) 366
[2018] EWHC 1306 (Ch), [2018] WLR(D) 366
England and Wales
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.618776
The plaintiff argued that the objects of the Secular Society Ltd, which had been registered under the Companies Acts, were unlawful.
Held: The House referred to ‘the last persons to go to the stake in this country pro salute animae’ in 1612 or thereabouts.
A certificate of incorporation given by the Registrar in respect of any association should be conclusive evidence that all the requirements of the Act in respect of registration and of matters precedent and incidental thereto had been complied with, and that the association was a company authorised to be registered and duly registered under the Act.
Lord Finlay LC said that the certificate was conclusive as to the existence of the society as a duly incorporated company: ‘What the Legislature was dealing with was the validity of the incorporation and it is for the purpose of incorporation, and for this purpose only, that the certificate is made conclusive’
Lord Dunedin said: ‘The certificate of incorporation in terms of the section quoted of the Companies Act, 1900, prevents any one alleging that the company does not exist’ ‘
Lord Parker of Waddington said: ‘The section does, however, preclude all His Majesty’s lieges from going behind the certificate or from alleging that the society is not a corporate body with the status and capacity conferred by the Acts’ . . And ‘[I]f the directors of the society applied its funds for an illegal object, they would be guilty of misfeasance and liable to replace the money, even if the object for which the money had been applied were expressly authorised by the memorandum.’
Lord Sumner said of the offence of blasphemous libel: ‘Our courts of law, in the exercise of their own jurisdiction, do not and never did that I can find, punish irreligious words as offences against God. As to them they held that deorum injuriae dis curae. They dealt with such words for their manner, their violence or ribaldry or, more fully stated for their tendency to endanger the public peace then and there, to deprave public morality generally, to shake the fabric of society and to be a cause of civil strife. The words, as well as the acts, which tend to endanger society differ from time to time in proportion as society is stable or insecure in fact, or is believed by its reasonable members to be open to assault.’
Lord Parker said: ‘In my opinion to constitute blasphemy at common law there must be such an element of vilification, ridicule, or irreverence as would be likely to exasperate the feelings of others and so lead to a breach of the peace’
Lord Sumner, Lord Finlay LC, Lord Dunedin, Lord Parker of Waddington
[1917] AC 406, [1916-17] All ER 1, 15 Cox CC 231
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others HL 24-Feb-2005
The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. . .
Cited – Green, Regina (on the Application of) v The City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court, Thoday, Thompson Admn 5-Dec-2007
The claimant appealed from the refusal by the magistrate to issue summonses for the prosecution for blashemous libel of the Director General of the BBC and the producers of a show entitled ‘Jerry Springer – The Opera.’
Held: The gist of the . .
Cited – Johns and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Derby City Council and Another Admn 28-Feb-2011
The claimants had acted as foster carers for several years, but challenged a potential decision to discontinue that when, as committed Christians, they refused to sign to agree to treat without differentiation any child brought to them who might be . .
Cited – Jetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others SC 22-Apr-2015
The liquidators of Bilta had brought proceedings against former directors and the appellant alleging that they were party to an unlawful means conspiracy which had damaged the company by engaging in a carousel fraud with carbon credits. On the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.223027
A person disqualified from acting as a company director might exceptionally be given permission to act as non-executive director in named companies where this appeared necessary and the cause of the original disqualification was unrelated.
As to the duties of directors, Jonathan Parker J said: ‘(i) Directors have, both collectively and individually, a continuing duty to acquire and maintain a sufficient knowledge and understanding of the company’s business to enable them properly to discharge their duties as directors. (ii) Whilst directors are entitled (subject to the articles of association of the company) to delegate particular functions to those below them in the management chain, and to trust their competence and integrity to a reasonable extent, the exercise of the power of delegation does not absolve a director from the duty to supervise the discharge of the delegated functions. (iii) No rule of universal application can be formulated as to the duty referred to in (ii) above. The extent of the duty, and the question whether it has been discharged, must depend on the facts of each particular case, including the director’s role in the management of the company.’
and ‘In considering the question of unfitness, the respondent’s conduct must be evaluated in context- ‘taken in its setting’ . . It follows . . that the court will assess the competence or otherwise of the respondent in the context of and by reference to the role in the management of the company which was in fact assigned to him or which he in fact assumed, and by reference to his duties and responsibilities in that role. Thus the existence and extent of any particular duty will depend upon how the particular business is organised and upon what part in the management of that business the respondent could reasonably be expected play (see Bishopsgate Investment Management Ltd (in liq) v. Maxwell (No 2) [1993] BCLC 1282 at 1285 per Hoffmann LJ) . . Thus while the requisite standard of competence does not vary according to the nature of the company’s business or to the respondent’s role in the management of that business- and in that sense it may be said that there is a ‘universal standard- that standard must be applied to the facts of each particular case. Hence to say that the Act envisages a ‘universal’ standard of competence applicable in all circumstances takes the matter little further since it says nothing about whether the requisite standard has been met in any particular case. What can be said is that the court, whilst taking full account of the demands made upon a respondent by his management role, will recognise incompetence in whatever circumstances and at whatever level of management it occurs, from the chairman of the board down to the most junior director.’
and: ‘In my judgment it can be no defence to a charge of unfitness based on incompetence for a respondent to contend that even if he was grossly incompetent in discharging the management role in fact assigned to him, or which he in fact assumed, nevertheless he has not been shown to be unfit to be concerned in the management of any company, since it is possible to conceive of a management role (whether in the company or companies in question or in some other company altogether-real or imagined) which he could have performed competently-what I might call the ‘lowest common denominator’ approach. In the context of an issue as to unfitness it is neither here nor there whether a respondent could have performed some other management role competently. That is not the test of ‘unfitness’ for the purposes of s 6 (although of course it may be a relevant factor in the context of an application for leave under s. 17 of the Act . .). Under s. 6 the court is concerned only with the conduct in respect of which complaint is made, set in the context of the respondent’s actual management role in the company. If in his conduct in that role the respondent was guilty of incompetence to the requisite degree, then a finding of unfitness will be made and (under s 6) a disqualification order must follow . .’
Jonathan Parker J
Gazette 25-Nov-1998, [1999] 1 BCLC 433
Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 17
England and Wales
Appeal from – In re Barings plc (No 5) CA 2000
A finding of breach of duty is neither necessary nor of itself sufficient for a finding of unfitness. As the judge (at first instance) observed a person may be unfit even though no breach of duty is proved against him or may remain fit . .
Cited – The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Goldberg, Mcavoy ChD 26-Nov-2003
The Secretary of State sought a disqualification order. The director argued that one shoul not be made in the absence of some breach of legal duty, some dishonesty should be shown.
Held: The answer was a mixture of fact and law. A breach of . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Ultraframe (UK) Ltd v Fielding and others ChD 27-Jul-2005
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills v Aaron and Others ChD 10-Dec-2009
The claimant sought a disqualification after the defendants had been directors of a company mis-selling Structured Capital at Risk products. The FSA had reported that they had been negligent.
Held: ‘I do not have to decide whether or not the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.81737
The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares.
Held: The duties of an auditor are founded in contract and the extent of the duties undertaken by contract must be interpreted in the light of the relevant statutory provisions and the relevant auditing standards. The duties are duties of reasonable care in carrying out the audit of the company’s accounts. They are owed to the company in the interests of its shareholders. No duty is owed directly to the individual shareholders. The shareholders’ interests are protected by the duty owed to the company.
Liability for economic loss for negligent mis-statement should be limited to situations where the statement was made to a known recipient for a specific purpose of which the maker was aware, and upon which the recipient had relied and acted upon to his detriment. The law has moved towards attaching greater significance to the more traditional categorisation of distinct and recognisable situations as guides to the existence, the scope and the limits of the varied duties of care which the law imposes. The House laid down a threefold test of foreseeability, proximity and fairness, and emphasised the desirability of incremental development of the law. The test was if ‘the court considers it fair, just and reasonable that the law should impose a duty of a given scope upon the one party for the benefit of the other’.
Lord Bridge of Harwich said: ‘But since the Anns case a series of decisions of the Privy Council and of your Lordships’ House . . have emphasised the inability of any single general principle to provide a practical test which can be applied to every situation to determine whether a duty of care is owed and, if so, what is its scope . . What emerges is that, in addition to the foreseeability of damage, necessary ingredients in any situation giving rise to a duty of care are that there should exist between the party owing the duty and the party to whom it is owed a relationship characterised by the law as one of ‘proximity’ or ‘neighbourhood’ and that the situation should be one in which the court considers it fair, just and reasonable that the law should impose a duty of a given scope upon the one party for the benefit of the other. . But it is implicit in the passages referred to that the concepts of proximity and fairness embodied in these additional ingredients are not susceptible of any such precise definition as would be necessary to give them utility as practical tests, but amount in effect to little more than convenient labels . . Whilst recognising, of course, the importance of the underlying general principles common to the whole field of negligence, I think the law has now moved in the direction of attaching greater significance to the more traditional categorisation of distinct and recognisable situations as guides to the existence, the scope and the limits of the varied duties of care which the law imposes. We must now, I think, recognise the wisdom of the words of Brennan J. in the High Court of Australia in Sutherland Shire Council v. Heyman (1985) 60 ALR 1, 43-44, where he said: ‘It is preferable, in my view, that the law should develop novel categories of negligence incrementally and by analogy with established categories . .’
Lord Bridge of Harwich, Lord Roskill, Lord Ackner, Lord Oliver of Aylmerton and Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle
[1990] 2 AC 605, [1990] UKHL 2, [1990] 1 All ER 568
Companies Act 1985 236(1)(2) 237(1)
England and Wales
Applied – Hedley Byrne and Co Ltd v Heller and Partners Ltd HL 28-May-1963
Banker’s Liability for Negligent Reference
The appellants were advertising agents. They were liable themselves for advertising space taken for a client, and had sought a financial reference from the defendant bankers to the client. The reference was negligent, but the bankers denied any . .
Cited – Candler v Crane Christmas and Co CA 15-Dec-1950
Though the accounts of the company in which the plaintiff had invested had been carelessly prepared and gave a wholly misleading picture of the state of the company, the plaintiff could not recover damages. A false statement, carelessly, as . .
Distinguished – JEB Fasteners Ltd v Marks, Bloom and Co CA 1981
Accountants prepared audited accounts knowing that the company was in financial difficulties, and the the accounts would be relied upon by the plaintiffs.
Held: The accountants owed a duty of care to the plaintiffs. They knew that they would . .
Distinguished – Twomax Ltd v Dickson, McFarlane and Robinson 1982
. .
Cited – Smith v Eric S Bush, a firm etc HL 20-Apr-1989
In Smith, the lender instructed a valuer who knew that the buyer and mortgagee were likely to rely on his valuation alone. The valuer said his terms excluded responsibility. The mortgagor had paid an inspection fee to the building society and . .
Cited – Al Saudi Banque v Clarke Pixley 1990
An auditor does not generally owe a duty of care in tort to a company’s creditors. Millet J referred to the Court of Appeal decision in Caparo: ‘In my judgment, Caparo’s case is binding authority for the following propositions. (i) In cases of . .
Cited – Dennis v Charnwood Borough Council CA 1983
The respondent approved plans for a new house. The raft foundation was inadequate and serious cracks developed. The authority appealed a finding of negligence in having approved defective plans.
Held: The appeal failed. The authority had a . .
Cited – Donoghue (or M’Alister) v Stevenson HL 26-May-1932
Decomposed Snail in Ginger Beer Bottle – Liability
The appellant drank from a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by the defendant. She suffered injury when she found a half decomposed snail in the liquid. The glass was opaque and the snail could not be seen. The drink had been bought for her by a . .
Cited – Dennis v Charnwood Borough Council CA 1983
The respondent approved plans for a new house. The raft foundation was inadequate and serious cracks developed. The authority appealed a finding of negligence in having approved defective plans.
Held: The appeal failed. The authority had a . .
Cited – Yuen Kun-Yeu v Attorney-General of Hong Kong PC 1987
(Hong Kong) The claimant deposited money with a licensed deposit taker, regulated by the Commissioner. He lost his money when the deposit taker went into insolvent liquidation. He said the regulator was responsible when it should have known of the . .
Cited – Rowling v Takaro Properties Ltd PC 30-Nov-1987
(New Zealand) The minister had been called upon to consent to the issue of shares to a foreign investor. The plaintiff said that the minister’s negligent refusal of consent had led to the collapse of the project and financial losses.
Held: On . .
Adopted – Sutherland Shire Council v Heyman 4-Jul-1985
(High Court of Australia) The court considered a possible extension of the law of negligence.
Brennan J said: ‘the law should develop novel categories of negligence incrementally and by analogy with established categories. ‘
Dean J said: . .
Cited – Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound No 1) PC 18-Jan-1961
Foreseeability Standard to Establish Negligence
Complaint was made that oil had been discharged into Sydney Harbour causing damage. The court differentiated damage by fire from other types of physical damage to property for the purposes of liability in tort, saying ‘We have come back to the plain . .
At QBD – Caparo Industries plc v Dickman QBD 5-Aug-1988
The plaintiff complained that they had suffered losses after purchasing shares in a company, relying upon statements made in the accounts by the auditors (third defendants).
Held: The claim failed. Whilst auditors might owe statutory duties to . .
At CA – Caparo Industries plc v Dickman CA 1989
The plaintiffs had purchased shares in a company, relying upon accounts prepared by the second defendant auditors. They appealed against a decision that the auditors did not owe them a duty in negligence, not being shareholders.
Held: The . .
Cited – Gwilliam v West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust and Others CA 24-Jul-2002
The claimant sought damages. She had been injured after the negligent erection of a stand which was known to be potentially hazardous. The contractor was uninsured, and the claimant sought damages from the Hospital which had arranged the fair in its . .
Cited – Johnson v Gore Wood and Co (A Firm) ChD 3-May-2002
The respondent firm acted on behalf of the claimant’s companies in land transactions. An option had been taken to purchase land, and he instructed the defendants to exercise it. The landowner claimed the notice to exercise the option was invalidly . .
Cited – K v the Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 31-May-2002
The applicant sought damages from the defendant who had released from custody pending deportation a man convicted of violent sexual crimes and who had then raped her. She appealed against a strike out of her claim. She had been refused information . .
Cited – Prosser v Castle Sanderson Solicitors (a Firm), Geoffrey Martin and Co (A Firm) CA 31-Jul-2002
The claimant sought damages from the respondent solicitors and insolvency practitioners for professional negligence. He had substantial business interests, but fell into financial difficulties, and sought assistance from the defendants. He failed to . .
Applied – Richard Vowles v David Evans, and The Welsh Rugby Union Limited CA 11-Mar-2003
The claimant had been injured in a rugby match, and had recovered damages from the referee, who now appealed.
Held: The relationship was proximate, and the injury reasonably forseeable, and if the referee failed to exercise reasonable care, . .
Cited – Equitable Life Assurance Society v Ernst and Young CA 25-Jul-2003
The claimant sought damages from its accountants, saying that had they been advised of the difficulties in their financial situation, they would have been able to avoid the loss of some 2.5 billion pounds, or to sell their assets at a time when . .
Cited – Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Limited (In Liquidation); BCCI Holdings (Luxembourg) SA (In Liquidation); Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (In Liquidation) v Price Waterhouse CA 13-Feb-1998
The special relationship between an auditor and a bank, meant that a duty of care could extend even to a second bank with its own auditors. In determining whether there had been an assumption of responsibility, the the relevant factors would include . .
Applied – JD, MAK and RK, RK and Another v East Berkshire Community Health, Dewsbury Health Care NHS Trust and Kirklees Metropolitan Council, Oldham NHS Trust and Dr Blumenthal CA 31-Jul-2003
Damages were sought by parents for psychological harm against health authorities for the wrongful diagnosis of differing forms of child abuse. They appealed dismissal of their awards on the grounds that it was not ‘fair just and reasonable’ to . .
Cited – DP Mann and others v Coutts and Co ComC 16-Sep-2003
The claimants were involved in litigation, They took certain steps on the understanding that the respondents had had deposited with them substantial sums in accounts under binding authorities. The bank had written a letter upon which they claim they . .
Cited – Berg Sons v Adams 1993
Speaking of the judgments in Caparo, Hobhouse J said: ‘The speeches of both Lord Bridge and Lord Oliver analysed the criteria necessary for the existence of a duty of care. They both concluded that the criteria included the identification of a . .
Cited – Chagos Islanders v The Attorney General, Her Majesty’s British Indian Ocean Territory Commissioner QBD 9-Oct-2003
The Chagos Islands had been a British dependent territory since 1814. The British government repatriated the islanders in the 1960s, and the Ilois now sought damages for their wrongful displacement, misfeasance, deceit, negligence and to establish a . .
Cited – Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust HL 16-Oct-2003
The claimant was disabled, and sought sterilisation because she feared the additional difficulties she would face as a mother. The sterilisation failed. She sought damages.
Held: The House having considered the issue in MacFarlane only . .
Cited – Great North Eastern Railway Limited v Hart and Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions and Network Rail Infrastructure Limited QBD 30-Oct-2003
A driver had crashed through a barrier before a bridge, and descended into the path of a train. Ten people died. He now sought a contribution order against the Secretary of State for the condition of the barrier which was said to be faulty.
Cited – Hughes v National Union of Mineworkers QBD 1991
The court struck out as disclosing no cause of action a claim by a police officer who was injured while policing the miners’ strike and who alleged that the police officer in charge had deployed his men negligently.
Held: The officer in charge . .
Cited – Platform Home Loans Ltd v Oyston Shipways Ltd and others HL 18-Feb-1999
The plaintiffs had lent about 1 million pounds on the security of property negligently valued at 1.5 million pounds. The property was sold for much less than that and the plaintiffs suffered a loss of 680,000 pounds. The judge found that the . .
Cited – Oldham and others v Georgina Kyrris and Another CA 4-Nov-2003
The claimant sought to bring a claim against the administrators of a partnership alleging a duty of care to creditors.
Held: Such an administrator owed no greater duty to creditors than would a director. That duty was no different whether the . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc ComC 3-Feb-2004
The claimant had obtained orders against two companies who banked with the respondent. Asset freezing orders were served on the bank, but within a short time the customer used the bank’s Faxpay national service to transfer substantial sums outside . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Lennon CA 20-Feb-2004
The claimant police officer considered being transferred to Northern Ireland. He asked and was incorrectly told that his housing allowance would not be affected by taking time off work.
Held: The break between employments had affected his . .
Cited – Binod Sutradhar v Natural Environment Research Council CA 20-Feb-2004
The defendant council had carried out research into a water supply in India in the 1980s. The claimant drank the water, and claimed damages for having consumed arsenic in it.
Held: There is a close link between the tests in law for proximity . .
Cited – McLoughlin v Jones; McLoughlin v Grovers (a Firm) CA 2002
In deciding whether a duty of care is established the court must go to the ‘battery of tests which the House of Lords has taught us to use’, namely: ‘. . the ‘purpose’ test (Banque Bruxelles Lambert SA v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd); the ‘assumption . .
Applied – Powell and Another v Boldaz and others CA 1-Jul-1997
The plaintiff’s son aged 10 died of Addison’s Disease which had not been diagnosed. An action against the Health Authority was settled. The parents then brought an action against 5 doctors in their local GP Practice in relation to matters that had . .
Cited – AB and others v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust QBD 26-Mar-2004
Representative claims were made against the respondents, hospitals, pathologists etc with regard to the removal of organs from deceased children without the informed consent of the parents. They claimed under the tort of wrongful interference.
Cited – Donachie v The Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police CA 7-Apr-2004
The claimant had been asked to work under cover. The surveillance equipment he was asked to use was faulty, requiring him to put himself at risk repeatedly to maintain it resulting in a stress disorder and a stroke.
Held: There was a direct . .
Cited – Jane Marianne Sandhar, John Stuart Murray v Department of Transport, Environment and the Regions CA 5-Nov-2004
The claimant’s husband died when his car skidded on hoar frost. She claimed the respondent was liable under the Act and at common law for failing to keep it safe.
Held: The respondent had not assumed a general responsibility to all road users . .
Cited – Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc CA 22-Nov-2004
The claimant had obtained judgment against customers of the defendant, and then freezing orders for the accounts. The defendants inadvertently or negligently allowed sums to be transferred from the accounts. The claimants sought repayment by the . .
Cited – Precis (521) Plc v William M Mercer Ltd CA 15-Feb-2005
Purchasers of a company sought to claim in negligence against the respondent actuaries in respect of a valuation of the company’s pension funds.
Held: There was a paucity of authority as to when a duty of care was assumed. The words used and . .
Cited – Barrett v London Borough of Enfield HL 17-Jun-1999
The claimant had spent his childhood in foster care, and now claimed damages against a local authority for decisions made and not made during that period. The judge’s decision to strike out the claim had been upheld by the Court of Appeal.
Cited – JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust and others HL 21-Apr-2005
Parents of children had falsely and negligently been accused of abusing their children. The children sought damages for negligence against the doctors or social workers who had made the statements supporting the actions taken. The House was asked if . .
Cited – Regina v Lam and Others (T/a ‘Namesakes of Torbay’) and Borough of Torbay CA 30-Jul-1997
The claimant sought damages after the planning authority allowed the first defendant to conduct a manufacturing business in the course of which spraying activities took place which caused them personal injuries and loss of business.
Held: The . .
Cited – Brooks v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and others HL 21-Apr-2005
The claimant was with Stephen Lawrence when they were both attacked and Mr Lawrence killed. He claimed damages for the negligent way the police had dealt with his case, and particularly said that they had failed to assess him as a victim of crime, . .
Cited – Islington London Borough Council v University College London Hospital NHS Trust CA 16-Jun-2005
The local authority sought repayment from a negligent hospital of the cost of services it had had to provide to an injured patient. They said that the hospital had failed to advise the patient to resume taking warfarin when her operation was . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis v Reeves (Joint Administratix of The Estate of Martin Lynch, Deceased) HL 15-Jul-1999
The deceased was a prisoner known to be at risk of committing suicide. Whilst in police custody he hanged himself in his prison cell. The Commissioner accepted that he was in breach of his duty of care to the deceased, but not that that breach was . .
Cited – West Bromwich Albion Football Club Ltd v El-Safty QBD 14-Dec-2005
The claimant sought damages from the defendant surgeon alleging negligent care of a footballer. The defendant argued that he had no duty to the club as employer of his patient who was being treated through his BUPA membership. It would have created . .
Cited – AbouRahmah and Another v Abacha and others QBD 28-Nov-2005
Claims were made as to an alleged fraud by some of the respondents. . .
Cited – Waters v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis HL 27-Jul-2000
A policewoman, having made a complaint of serious sexual assault against a fellow officer complained again that the Commissioner had failed to protect her against retaliatory assaults. Her claim was struck out, but restored on appeal.
Held: . .
Cited – French and others v Chief Constable of Sussex Police CA 28-Mar-2006
The claimants sought damages for psychiatric injury. They were police officers who had been subject to unsuccessful proceedings following a shooting of a member of the public by their force.
Held: The claim failed: ‘these claimants have no . .
Cited – Farraj and Another v King’s Healthcare NHS Trust and Another QBD 26-May-2006
The claimants sought damages after the birth of their child with a severe hereditary disease which they said the defendant hospital had failed to diagnose after testing for that disease. The hospital sought a contribution from the company CSL who . .
Cited – HM Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc HL 21-Jun-2006
The claimant had served an asset freezing order on the bank in respect of one of its customers. The bank paid out on a cheque inadvertently as to the order. The Commissioners claimed against the bank in negligence. The bank denied any duty of care. . .
Cited – Sutradhar v Natural Environment Research Council HL 5-Jul-2006
Preliminary Report of Risk – No Duty of Care
The claimant sought damages after suffering injury after the creation of water supplies which were polluted with arsenic. He said that a report had identified the risks. The defendant said that the report was preliminary only and could not found a . .
Cited – B and B v A County Council CA 21-Nov-2006
The claimants sought damages from the defendant local authority after their identities had been wrongfully revealed to the natural parents of the adoptees leading to a claimed campaign of harassment. The adopters has specifically requested that . .
Cited – Marc Rich and Co Ag and Others v Bishop Rock Marine Co Ltd and Others HL 6-Jul-1995
A surveyor acting on behalf of the classification society had recommended that after repairs specified by him had been carried out a vessel, the Nicholas H, should be allowed to proceed. It was lost at sea.
Held: The marine classification . .
Cited – Vellino v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police CA 31-Jul-2001
The police were not under any duty to protect someone who had been arrested from injuring himself in an attempt to escape. The claimant had a history of seeking to avoid capture by jumping from his flat window. On this occasion he injured himself in . .
Cited – Jain and Another v Trent Strategic Health Authority CA 22-Nov-2007
The claimant argued that the defendant owed him a duty of care as proprietor of a registered nursing home in cancelling the registration of the home under the 1984 Act. The authority appealed a finding that it owed such a duty.
Held: The . .
Cited – Pierce v Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council QBD 13-Dec-2007
The claimant sought damages, saying that the local authority had failed to protect him when he was a child against abuse by his parents.
Held: The claimant had been known to the authority since he was a young child, and they owed him a duty of . .
Cited – K v Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust and Another QBD 30-May-2008
The claimant appealed against an order striking out his claim in negligence. He had leaped from a window in a suicide attempt. The accommodation was provided by the defendant whilst caring for him under the 1983 Act.
Held: The case should be . .
Cited – Welton, Welton v North Cornwall District Council CA 17-Jul-1996
The defendant authority appealed a finding that it was liable in negligence from the conduct of one of its environmental health officers. The plaintiff had set out to refurbish and open a restaurant. He said the officer gave him a list of things he . .
Cited – Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 30-Jul-2008
Police Obligations to Witnesses is Limited
A prosecution witness was murdered by the accused shortly before his trial. The parents of the deceased alleged that the failure of the police to protect their son was a breach of article 2.
Held: The House was asked ‘If the police are alerted . .
Cited – Trent Strategic Health Authority v Jain and Another HL 21-Jan-2009
The claimants’ nursing home business had been effectively destroyed by the actions of the Authority which had applied to revoke their licence without them being given notice and opportunity to reply. They succeeded on appeal, but the business was by . .
Cited – Mitchell and Another v Glasgow City Council HL 18-Feb-2009
(Scotland) The pursuers were the widow and daughter of a tenant of the respondent who had been violently killed by his neighbour. They said that the respondent, knowing of the neighbour’s violent behaviours had a duty of care to the deceased and . .
Cited – Moore Stephens (A Firm) v Stone Rolls Ltd (in liquidation) HL 30-Jul-2009
The appellants had audited the books of the respondent company, but had failed to identify substantial frauds by an employee of the respondent. The auditors appealed a finding of professional negligence, relying on the maxim ex turpi causa non . .
Cited – Patchett and Another v Swimming Pool and Allied Trades Association Ltd CA 15-Jul-2009
The claimant suffered damages when the contractor he engaged to construct his swimming pool went into liquidation. Before employing him, he had consulted the defendant’s web-site which suggested that its members were checked for solvency on becoming . .
Cited – Maga v The Trustees of The Birmingham Archdiocese of The Roman Catholic Church CA 16-Mar-2010
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for damages after alleging sexual abuse by a catholic priest. The judge had found the church not vicariously liable for the injuries, and that the archdiocese had not been under a duty further to . .
Cited – Connor v Surrey County Council CA 18-Mar-2010
The claimant teacher said that she suffered personal injury from stress after the board of governors improperly failed to protect her from from false complaints. The Council now appealed against an award of substantial damages.
Held: The . .
Cited – Lambert and Others v Barratt Homes Ltd and Another CA 16-Jun-2010
The claimants had bought houses from the first defendants, who in turn had bought the land from Rochdale, the second defendants. In preparing the land for construction the first defendants were said to have negligently filled in a drainage culvert . .
Cited – Winter and Another v Regina CACD 6-Jul-2010
The defendants, father and son, operated a firework storage facility. Two fire service employees died when a fire was fought. They were thought to have been storing Type 1 fireworks for which they had no licence. They were each convicted of . .
Cited – McKie v Swindon College QBD 11-Feb-2011
The claimant sought damages after having moved jobs, his former employer wrote to his new one saying that he would not be welcome back on the campus, which would be a substantial part, giving reasons.
Held: The claimant succeeded on liability. . .
Mentioned – Woodland v The Swimming Teachers’ Association and Others QBD 17-Oct-2011
The court was asked as to the vicarious or other liability of a school where a pupil suffered injury at a swimming lesson with a non-employee during school time, and in particular whether it had a non-delegable duty to ensure the welfare of children . .
Cited – Woodland v Essex County Council CA 9-Mar-2012
The claimant had been injured in a swimming pool during a lesson. The lesson was conducted by outside independent contractors. The claimant appealed against a finding that his argument that they had a non-delegable duty of care was bound to fail. . .
Cited – Glaister and Others v Appelby-In-Westmorland Town Council CA 9-Dec-2009
The claimant was injured when at a horse fair. A loose horse kicked him causing injury. They claimed in negligence against the council for licensing the fair without ensuring that public liability insurance. The Council now appealed agaiinst a . .
Cited – Michael and Others v South Wales Police and Another CA 20-Jul-2012
The deceased had called the police and said her life was under immediate threat. An officer downgraded its seriousness, and she was killed within 15 minutes by her partner, and before the officers arrived. She had sought assistance four times . .
Cited – Alcock and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police QBD 31-Jul-1990
Overcrowding at a football match lead to the deaths of 95 people. The defendant’s employees had charge of safety at the match, and admitted negligence vis-a-vis those who had died and been injured. The plaintiffs sought damages, some of them for . .
Cited – Cockbill v Riley QBD 22-Mar-2013
The claimant sufferd catastrophic injury diving into a paddling pool at a party held by the defendant for his daughter to celebrate completing her GCSEs.
Held: The claim failed. ‘It was reasonably foreseeable that someone would lose his . .
Cited – Cramaso Llp v Viscount Reidhaven’s Trustees SCS 11-May-2010
Outer House – The pursuer said that it had been misled into taking a lease of a grouse moor by the responders making a repesentation to Mr Erskine who had conducted negotiations, and then created the pursuer as a vehicle for the lease. He sought the . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Cramaso Llp v Rt Hon Ian Derek Francis OgilIe-Grant, Earl of Seafield and Others SCS 7-Dec-2011
Inner House The defenders owned a grouse moor. There had been difficulties with the grouse population, and efforts over several years to restore them. The defenders sought to find a tenant. Negotiations were conducted with Mr Erskine, and an email . .
Cited – Schubert Murphy (A Firm) v The Law Society QBD 17-Dec-2014
The claimant solicitors’ firm had acted in a purchase, but the vendors were represented by fraudsters presenting themselves as solicitors, registering with the defendant in names of retired solicitors, and who made off with the money intended for . .
Cited – Michael and Others v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police and Another SC 28-Jan-2015
The claimants asserted negligence in the defendant in failing to provide an adequate response to an emergency call, leading, they said to the death of their daughter at the hands of her violent partner. They claimed also under the 1998 Act. The . .
Cited – OPO v MLA and Another CA 9-Oct-2014
The claimant child sought to prevent publication by his father of an autobiography which, he said, would be likely to cause him psychological harm. The father was well known classical musician who said that he had himself suffered sexual abuse as a . .
Cited – The Law Society of England and Wales v Schubert Murphy (A Firm) CA 25-Aug-2017
The solicitors had made use of the online facility provided by the appellant Law Society to verify the bona fides of a firm of solicitors acting for a third party to a transaction. Relying upon the information, they suffered losses, and claimed in . .
Cited – Meadows v Khan QBD 23-Nov-2017
Claim for the additional costs of raising the claimant’s son, A, who suffered from both haemophilia and autism. It is admitted that, but for the defendant’s negligence, A would not have been born because his mother would have discovered during her . .
Cited – Kennedy v Cordia (Services) Llp SC 10-Feb-2016
The appellant care worker fell in snow when visiting the respondent’s client at home. At issue was the admission and status of expert or skilled evidence.
Held: Mrs Kennedy’s appeal succeeded. ‘There are in our view four considerations which . .
Cited – Campbell v Gordon SC 6-Jul-2016
The employee was injured at work, but in a way excluded from the employers insurance cover. He now sought to make the sole company director liable, hoping in term to take action against the director’s insurance brokers for negligence, the director . .
Cited – BPE Solicitors and Another v Hughes-Holland (In Substitution for Gabriel) SC 22-Mar-2017
The court was asked what damages are recoverable in a case where (i) but for the negligence of a professional adviser his client would not have embarked on some course of action, but (ii) part or all of the loss which he suffered by doing so arose . .
Cited – NA v Nottinghamshire County Council QBD 2-Dec-2014
The claimant said that as a child the defendant had failed in its duty to protect her from her abusive mother and later from foster parents.
Held: Males J, dealt with the issues of liability and limitation, leaving issues concerning causation . .
Cited – Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council SC 18-Oct-2017
The claimant had been abused as a child by foster parents with whom she had been placed by the respondent authority. The court was now asked, the Council not having been negligent, were they in any event liable having a non-delegable duty of care . .
Cited – Dodson v Environment Agency QBD 28-Feb-2013
The claimant asserted that the steps taken by the defendant to encourage wildlife in the estuary had led to otters predating his fish farm stocks, and that the claimant had not been informed of this, in particular as to the construction of otter . .
Cited – Robinson v West Yorkshire Police CA 5-Feb-2014
The claimant was a bystander, injured during an arrest on the street by officers employed by the respondent. She now appealed against rejection of her claim in negligence. Held; No duty of care was owed, and that, even if the officers had owed Mrs . .
Considered – Elguzouli-Daf v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Another CA 16-Nov-1994
The Court upheld decisions striking out actions for negligence brought by claimants who had been arrested and held in custody during criminal investigations which were later discontinued. The Crown Prosecution Service owes no general duty of care to . .
Cited – Steel and Another v NRAM Ltd (Formerly NRAM Plc) SC 28-Feb-2018
The appellant solicitor acted in a land transaction. The land was mortgaged to the respondent bank. She wrote to the bank stating her client’s intention to repay the whole loan. The letter was negligently mistaken and the bankers allowed the . .
Cited – James McNaughton Paper Group Ltd v Hicks Anderson and Co CA 31-Jul-1990
When considering the liability of an auditor in negligence, the fact and nature of any communications direct between the auditor and the potential investor must be allowed for. The court set out a non-exhaustive list of factors to be taken into . .
Cited – James-Bowen and Others v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis SC 25-Jul-2018
The Court was asked whether the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (‘the Commissioner’) owes a duty to her officers, in the conduct of proceedings against her based on their alleged misconduct, to take reasonable care to protect them from . .
Cited – Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro Spa v Playboy Club London Ltd and Others SC 26-Jul-2018
The Playboy casino required a reference for a customer, but asked for this through a third party. The bank was not aware of the agency but gave a good reference for a customer who had never deposited any money with them and nor to whom it had issued . .
Cited – Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust SC 10-Oct-2018
The claimant had been assaulted. He presented at the defendant hospital with head injuries. Despite his complaints he said he was not treated properly, being told to wait five hours at reception, and went home. Later an ambulance was delayed and he . .
Cited – Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v Lungowe and Others SC 10-Apr-2019
The claimants alleged negligence causing them personal injury and other losses arising from pollution from mining operations of the defendants in Zambia. The company denied jurisdiction. In the Court of Appeal the defendants’ appeals were dismissed. . .
Cited – Poole Borough Council v GN and Another SC 6-Jun-2019
This appeal is concerned with the liability of a local authority for what is alleged to have been a negligent failure to exercise its social services functions so as to protect children from harm caused by third parties. The principal question of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.174256
(Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Free movement of capital and liberalisation of payments – Restrictions – Taxation of dividends paid to undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities (UCITS) – Dividends paid by companies resident in one Member State to non-resident UCITS – Tax exemption for dividends paid by companies resident in one Member State to resident UCITS – Justifications – Balanced allocation between Member States of the power to impose taxes – Coherence of the tax system – Proportionality
C-480/16, [2018] EUECJ C-480/16
European
Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.618754
(Opinion) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Free movement of capital – Articles 56 and 57 EC – Movements of capital between Member States and third countries – Restrictions – Standstill clause – Direct investment – Regulation of a Member State providing for the taxation of income from companies with their headquarters abroad – Justification – Combating purely artificial arrangements – Balanced distribution of the power of taxation – Preservation of the effectiveness of tax audits
ECLI: EU: C: 2018:389, [2018] EUECJ C-135/17 – O
European
Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.617002
Post judgment application for time to pay.
The Honourable Mr. Justice Marcus Smith
[2018] EWHC 1232 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616905
[2018] EWHC 1215 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616896
Morgan J
[2018] EWHC 1102 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616898
Marsh CM
[2018] EWHC 1064 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616147
The court was asked: ‘i) Whether permission to continue company derivative proceedings should now be given pursuant to s263 Companies Act 2006 (‘CA 2006’);
ii) Whether retrospective permission should be granted to begin the proceedings, thereby validating certain procedural steps that have been taken in the proceedings without permission of the court, namely service of the proceedings and service of particulars of claim.
[2018] EWHC 911 (Ch), [2018] WLR(D) 292
England and Wales
Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616149
Marcus Smith J
[2018] EWHC 1040 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616146
Unfair prejudice petitions
[2018] EWHC 1035 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616140
Public Company – Benefit Building Society – Winding-up
[1879] SLR 17 – 221
Scotland
Updated: 20 April 2022; Ref: scu.614879
Partnership – Liability of Firm for Money Borrowed by Managing Partner whose Name was also Firm’s Name
[1879] SLR 17 – 207
Scotland
Updated: 20 April 2022; Ref: scu.614871
Partnership – Conventional Irritancy of ‘Declared Insolvency’ – Where Held to be Applicable.
[1879] SLR 17 – 236
Scotland
Updated: 20 April 2022; Ref: scu.614874
The court considered a jurisdiction clause in a bill of lading which referred to the carrier’s principal place of business. The central management and control of the company was in Germany and the question was whether that was also its principal place of business.
Held: It was. The shareholders and officers of the shipowning company were all German, directors’ meetings were held in Hamburg, contractual commitments such as vessel charters had to be authorised from Hamburg and all earnings were remitted to Hamburg. Germany was the principal place of business rather than Hong Kong. Hong Kong was the principal place of business of the vessel’s managing agents. That company was in fact and not merely legal fiction a separate entity. The ‘principal’ place of business of a corporation within the article meant the ‘chief’ or ‘most important’ place of its business. The principal place was not necessarily where most of its business was carried out.
Leggatt LJ
[1991] 2 Lloyds Rep 325
England and Wales
Cited – King v Crown Energy Trading AG and another ComC 11-Feb-2003
The defendant, a company incorporated in Russia, sought to set aside proceedings served on it. The contract made the agreement subject to the laws of England and Wales, but the Convention made the jurisdiction clause unenforceable. Evidence . .
Cited – 889457 Alberta Inc v Katanga Mining Ltd and others ComC 5-Nov-2008
The parties had set out on a joint venture with deeds providing for control of the shareholdings in each other. The claimant asserted a breach of the deed and sought a remedy. The first defendant company, incorporated in Bermuda argued that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 April 2022; Ref: scu.180099
The company resisted an application for release of a copy of the register of members to the respondent. The company, long established was under a duty to trace
Held: The request was invalid in form and had been for an improper purpose.
Registrar Briggs
[2015] EWHC 222 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 20 April 2022; Ref: scu.566760