Singla v Hedman and Others: ChD 28 Apr 2010

The claimant sought an order for wrongful trading against the former directors of a company in liquidation, and to set aside agreements entered into after the liquidation, but backdated to before. The agreements related to the proposed making of a film.
Held: The first defendant had not been truthful.

Judges:

Peter Smith J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 902 (Ch), [2010] BCC 684, [2010] 2 BCLC 61

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoSingla v Hedman and Others ChD 27-Nov-2009
. .
CitedMessager v British Broadcasting Association Co HL 1929
M composed of the music for a French opera ‘Le Petit Michus’. An English version was to be produced in London on the terms of an agreement, describing itself as a licence, between the composer and the authors of the opera, between the licensors, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Company, Contract

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.408672

Cotman v Brougham: HL 6 May 1918

A company E, incorporated under the Companies (Consolidation) Act 1908, underwrote and received allotment of shares in the A company which it transferred to the L company. All three companies being in liquidation the liquidator of the A company put the L company on the A list of contributories in respect of the said shares, and the E company on the B list. The liquidator of the E company brought an action claiming to have the E company omitted from the B list on the ground that the underwriting of the shares was ultra vires of the E company.
Held that under section 17 of the Companies (Consolidation) Act 1908 the certificate of incorporation was conclusive evidence that section 3 had been complied with; the memorandum of association was therefore valid, and under it the underwriting was intra vires.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Finlay), Lords Atkinson, Parker, and Wrenbury

Citations:

[1918] UKHL 358, 56 SLR 358

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Company

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.631472

West v Blanchet and others: ChD 9 Feb 2000

When a court looked at two competing offers between shareholders to buy out the interest of the other, the court could, in selecting the best offer, take account not just of the extent of involvement in the management of the company by the respective parties, but also the anticipated ability of each to deliver the offer made.

Citations:

Times 09-Feb-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Company

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.90398

Re Ledingham-Smith: ChD 1993

The bankrupt’s accountants had been paid their fees by standing order. Arrears mounted and the sum was increased. On the bankruptcy, the trustee sought to recover the increased payment. The court considered whether they had been given a preference.
Held: The accountants had continued to act, and therefore were not in a better position than they would have been had they stopped work and not been paid. To be a preference, there had to be shown evidence of a ‘preference in fact’. Morritt J said that: ‘it may be that pressure does not displace desire in the way that it formerly displaced a dominant intention to prefer but it can certainly affect the question of desire.’
and ‘The phrase ‘will be better’ in relation to the event of the individual’s bankruptcy used in Section 340(3)(b) envisages a bankruptcy after the doing of the thing in question. It also predicates that the position will be better, not may be.’

Judges:

Morritt J

Citations:

[1993] BCLC 635

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 249 435

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedQuickson (South and West) Limited v Stephen Mark Katz, John Stephen Kelmanson (As Joint Liquidators of Buildlead Limited) ChD 25-Aug-2004
Various applications were made in the insolvency, including for removal of the liquidators and declarations that certain payments were a fraudulent preference on the creditors.
Held: No prejudice had been shown by any procedural irregularity. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Insolvency

Updated: 07 February 2022; Ref: scu.216394

Bracken Partners Ltd v Gutteridge and Others: ChD 31 Mar 2003

The claimant sought to claim against former directors of a company in which it held shares under the rule in Foss v Harbottle.

Judges:

Peter Leaver QC

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1064 (Ch), [2003] 2 BCLC 84, [2003] WTLR 1241

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedFoss v Harbottle 25-Mar-1843
Company alone may sue for legal wrong against it.
A bill was lodged by two of the proprietors of shares in a company incorporated by Act of Parliament, on their own and the other shareholders’ behalf. They claimed against three bankrupt directors, a proprietor, solicitor and architect charging them . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company

Updated: 07 February 2022; Ref: scu.560719

Re DTEK Finance Plc: ChD 2 Dec 2016

Application for an order to be made pursuant to section 896 of the Companies Act 2006 convening a meeting of creditors for the purposes of considering and, if thought fit, approving a proposed scheme of arrangement.

Judges:

Newey J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 3562 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Companies Act 2006 896

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Company

Updated: 04 February 2022; Ref: scu.577840

Syme v Benhar Coal Co: SCS 12 Dec 1878

An application was presented to the Court by the provisional liquidator of a limited company to restrain a debenture holder from obtaining decree for the amount contained in his debenture bond. Held that the debenture holder was entitled to have decree, the liquidator not being prepared to find security for any damages the creditor might suffer, and application refused.
Held: Reid, a creditor of the Benhar Coal Company, had presented a petition for the judicial liquidation of the company. Upon representations by the company to the effect that they wished to investigate their affairs fully, and would require time, the Court of consent meantime appointed Mr Molleson, C.A., provisional liquidator.
In these circumstances, and Reid’s petition being still in Court, Thomas Syme, a debenture holder, raised an action in the Court of Session concluding for payment of andpound;1000, the amount contained in certain debenture bonds which he held of the company, and the provisional liquidator, with the concurrence of the company, in these circumstances presented a note to the Court applying to have Syme restrained from obtaining such decree.
The 85th section of the Companies Act 1862 was as follows:-‘The Court may, at any time after the presentation of a petition for winding-up a company under this Act, and before making an order for winding-up the company, upon the application of the Company, or of any creditor or contributory of the company, restrain further proceedings in any action, suit, or proceeding against the company, upon such terms as the Court thinks fit.’

Citations:

[1878] SLR 16 – 210

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Company, Insolvency

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.577487

Jamieson, Official Liquidator of The Garpel Heamatite Co (Ltd), Petitioner: SCS 13 Mar 1867

Articles and a memorandum of association were subscribed by the intending partners of a limited company, bearing that the ‘nominal capital of the company is pounds 105,000, divided into 1000 shares of pounds 105 each, whereof pounds 100,000 is paid up, and pounds 5000 remains to be called.’ A petition was presented by the official liquidator, in the winding-up of the company, alleging that the statement as to paid-up capital was false, that, in fact, no part of the subscribed capital was paid up, and that the subscribers to the memorandum and articles knew this to be the case; and craving the Court to settle a list of contributories as proposed by him, and make a call of pounds 30 per share. In a question between the petitioner and certain parties, who had purchased shares from original shareholders subsequent to the formation of the company, and who disputed their liability for more than pounds 5 per share or such part thereof as remained unpaid, held, by a majority of the whole Court, that the petitioner was entitled to a proof of the grounds upon which he contended that the names of these parties ought to be placed on the list of contributories. Opinion, by majority, that the limit of liability depended not on the bona fides of purchasers of shares, but on the fact, how far the amount of the shares was paid or unpaid. Held, that to the effect of enforcing any statutory liability of the share-holders to the creditors of the company the liquidator represents the creditors.

Citations:

[1867] SLR 5 – 372

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Company, Torts – Other

Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.574832

Randall and Quilter Investment Holdings Plc: ComC 3 Jul 2013

Application for the sanction of the court to a proposed scheme of arrangement pursuant to sections 895 and following of the Companies Act 2006. The scheme also involves a reduction of the share capital of the company, for which the court’s confirmation is sought.

Judges:

Henderson J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 4357 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Company

Updated: 31 January 2022; Ref: scu.575327

Rixon v Edinburgh Northern Tramways Co and Others: HL 22 Jun 1893

A company incorporated by a private Act for the construction of a tramway, with a nominal capital, which was never offered to the public, but which was taken up partly by the promoters of the company, and to the extent of the remainder of the shares was acquired by the contractor in payment of the price of the work performed, entered into a contract for the remainder of the work with the same contractor.
A shareholder sought to reduce this contract (1) on the ground of fraud, alleging that the majority of the shareholders who voted in favour thereof were nominees of the contractor, and had obtained their shares gratuitously and for the purpose of voting in his favour; (2) on the ground of ultra vires, as the contract had not been offered to competition as required by a clause in a contract which was scheduled to the company’s Act.
Held (aff. judgment of the First Division) (1) that the contractor’s influence in the company had been legitimately acquired; and (2) that the pursuer not being a party to the contract, which provided for competition, he had no title to insist in the plea of ultra vires.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Herschell) and Lords Watson, Ashbourne, Morris, and Shand

Citations:

[1893] UKHL 944

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Contract, Company

Updated: 31 January 2022; Ref: scu.633302

Muirhead v The Forth and North Sea Steamboat Mutual Insurance Association: HL 17 Nov 1893

A mutual steamboat insurance company passed a special resolution altering one of its articles of association by inserting a regulation that it should be a condition of any insurance effected by the company on any vessel that the assured should keep one-fifth of the value of such vessel uninsured. The resolution was confirmed on the same day as it was passed contrary to the provisions of section 51 of the Companies Act 1862, which require a fortnight to elapse between the passing and confirming of a special resolution. After the resolution was registered a shipowner insured a vessel with the company for pounds 1000. The declared value of the vessel was pounds 3750, and it was provided in the policy that the articles of association should be deemed part thereof. The shipowners subsequently insured the same vessel with another company for pounds 3000.
In an action by the shipowner, held ( aff. the judgment of the First Division) that as the regulation contained in the special resolution was not contrary to the original articles of association, and was perfectly legal in itself, it was quite within the power of the company to make it a condition of the policies issued by them; that though the regulation had not validly been made part of the articles of association, the pursuer having accepted it as part of his contract, and having violated the condition it contained, could not recover under his policy.
A shipowner insured a steamer with an insurance company, the policy providing that the steamer for the purposes of the agreement between the insurers and the assured was and should be valued at pounds 3750.
Held ( aff. the judgment of the First Division) that in considering whether the assured had violated a condition of the policy which required him to keep one-fifth of the value of the steamer uninsured, the value of the steamer must be taken to be the value declared in the policy.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Lord Herschell)), and Lords Watson, Ashbourne, Shand, and Bowen

Citations:

[1893] UKHL 467, 31 SLR 467

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Company, Insurance

Updated: 31 January 2022; Ref: scu.633308

Wenlock v Moloney: CA 1965

The plaintiff alleged a conspiracy to deprive him of his shares and interest in a company. Each side filed affidavit evidence raising issues of fact. With no oral evidence or cross examination on the affidavits, the Master, after a four day hearing, made a striking out order which was upheld on appeal to the Judge in Chambers.
Held: The strike out was an impermissible trial of the facts on affidavit. That usurped the function of the trial judge. The strike out procedure was not intended to be used in cases which involved a minute and protracted examination of documents and facts to see if the plaintiff had a case. The jurisdiction was confined to ‘plain and obvious’ cases, such as where a plaintiff was attempting to resurrect a matter which had already been litigated or where the grievance was ‘mythical’. It was not sufficient to justify striking out a case that the plaintiff’s claim was ‘highly improbable’ or that it was difficult to believe that it could be proved. It was a jurisdiction that was to be used ‘sparingly’ and only in ‘very exceptional cases’: ‘The position under two former rules has been incorporated in the present RSC Ord. 18, r. 19. There is no doubt that the inherent power of the court remains, but this summary jurisdiction of the court was never intended to be exercised by a minute and protracted examination of the documents and facts of the case, in order to see whether the plaintiff really has a cause of action. To do that is to usurp the position of the trial judge, and to produce a trial of the case in chambers, on affidavits only, without discovery and without oral evidence tested by cross-examination in the ordinary way. This seems to me to be an abuse of the inherent power of the court and not a proper exercise of that power.’

Judges:

Danckwerts LJ

Citations:

[1965] 1 WLR 1238, [1965] 2 All ER 871

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedLawrence v Lord Norreys HL 1890
The plaintiff brought an action for recovery of possession of an estate, relying on events which had occurred 70 years earlier. The plaintiff had already brought a case which was dismissed on the grounds that it was statute-barred. The plaintiff . .

Cited by:

CitedEquitable 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 . .
CitedGuinness Peat Group Plc v British Land Company Plc and others CA 18-Dec-1998
The claimant, a minority shareholder, had said that the defendant had acted prejudicially in transferring the company’s only substantial asset to another company. The respondent said that since the shares had always been of nil value they could not . .
CitedHess v Horncastle Properties Limited WA Horncastle (Builders) Limited CA 6-Nov-1998
It was alleged that signatures on plans attached to a conveyance were not those of the party. A witness said that only the document itself had been signed. They now appealed against a strike out of their claim.
Held: ‘it will be only in the . .
CitedSeray-Wurie v The Charity Commission of England and Wales QBD 23-Apr-2008
The defendant sought an order to strike out the claimant’s allegations of defamation and other torts. The defendants claimed qualified privilege in that the statements complained of were contained in a report prepared by it in fulfilment of its . .
CitedVedanta 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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Company

Updated: 30 January 2022; Ref: scu.184848

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 for the company. In the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, North J said: ‘These powers were moreover delegated to him for life and there remained with the company no power of management whatsoever. One of his first acts was to appoint himself the only pilot of the company, for, although article 33 foreshadowed this appointment, yet a contract could only spring into existence after the company had been incorporated. Therefore, he became in effect both employer and worker. True, the contract of employment was between himself and the company: see Booth v Helliwell, but on him lay the duty both of giving orders and obeying them. In our view, the two offices are clearly incompatible. There could exist no power of control and therefore the relationship of master-servant was not created.’
Held: Appeal allowed. ‘one person may function in dual capacities. ‘ and ‘Ex facie there was a contract of service . . the real issue is whether the position of the deceased as sole governing director made it impossible for him to be the servant of the company in the capacity of chief pilot of the company. . . there was no such impossibility. There appears to be no greater difficulty in holding that a man acting in one capacity can give orders to himself in another capacity than there is in holding that a man acting in one capacity can make a contract with himself in another capacity. The company and the deceased were separate legal entities. The company had the right to decide what contracts for aerial top-dressing it would enter into. The deceased was the agent of the company in making the necessary decisions.’

Judges:

Viscount Simons, Lord Reid, Lord Tucker, Lord Denning, Lord Morris

Citations:

[1960] 3 All ER 420, [1960] UKPC 33, [1960] 3 WLR 758, [1961] AC 12

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedSalomon v A Salomon and Company Ltd HL 16-Nov-1896
A Company and its Directors are not same paersons
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 . .

Cited by:

CitedBen 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Employment, Commonwealth

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.445368

Regina v RL and JF: CACD 28 Aug 2008

Club, not members, prosecutable for breach

The Environment Agency appealed against dismissal of charges against the defendants who were officers in an unincorporated members’ golf club on whose land there had been pollution. The judge had ruled that the unincorporated association could have been prosecuted under the 1978 Act, and that a prosecution would not lie against the defendants in the absence of personal culpability.
Held: The Act made no provision to allow prosecution of unincorporated associations, and no general policy could be derived for construing such provisions, because there were such a wide range of provsions. It was not possible to draw from the absence of provisions a conclusion that unincorporated associations could not be prosecuted. In this case the offence was one of strict liability falling on the owner of the land. In every sense that in practice meant the association. Any penalty would be set by reference to the means not of the two defendants but of the club, and any conviction might have real consequences for a defendant; ‘We conclude that the judge was right in his first decision. The prosecution of the club was permissible in law. The definition of ‘person’ in the Interpretation Act 1978 applied and no contrary intention appeared.’
The judge had decided that section 217 of the 1991 meant that the club’s officers could not be prosecuted. The Act contained no ‘officers’ liability’ provision, but the judge went too far in reading into the Act a provision limiting the liability of officers in an unincorporated association to the equivalent responsibility of those in a company. Unincorporated associations varied too widely. ‘a prosecution for the strict liability offence of causing polluting matter to enter controlled waters may be brought, on the facts of this case, against either the club in its own name, or against individual members. It is for the Crown in any individual case to determine the defendant(s) whom it seeks to prosecute. The court would interfere only in the very limited case of oppression involving abuse of process.’
Hughes LJ said: ‘There are probably almost as many different types of unincorporated association as there are forms of human activity. This particular one was a club with 900 odd members, substantial land, buildings and other assets, and it had no doubt stood as an entity in every sense except the legal for many years. But the legal description ‘unincorporated association’ applies equally to any collection of individuals linked by agreement into a group. Some may be sold and permanent; others may be fleeting, and/or without assets. A village football team, with no constitution and a casual fluctuating membership, meeting on a Saturday morning on a rented pitch, is an unincorporated association, but so are a number of learned societies with large fixed assets and detailed constitutional structures . .’

Judges:

Hughes LJ, David Clarke J,Blair J

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Crim 1970, [2009] 1 All ER 786

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 2003 58, Water Resources Act 1991 217(1), Interpretation Act 1978 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedEmpress Car Company (Abertillery) Ltd v National Rivers Authority HL 22-Jan-1998
A diesel tank was in a yard which drained into a river. It was surrounded by a bund to contain spillage, but that protection was over ridden by an extension pipe from the tank to a drum outside the bund. Someone opened a tap on that pipe so that . .
CitedLockwood, Regina v CACD 1-May-2008
. .
CitedRegina v R CACD 29-Feb-2008
The court considered the application of section 58 to prosecution appeals and the use of the ‘acquittal agreement’. . .
CitedW Stevenson and Sons (A Partnership) and Another v Regina CACD 25-Feb-2008
The defendant partnership had been convicted of offences of failing to submit sales notes of the results of its fish auctions. Some individual partners sought to appeal.
Held: The statute could make a partnership liable as a separate entity. . .
CitedTaff Vale Railway Co v Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants HL 22-Jul-1901
A trade union, an unincorporated association, could be sued in its own name despite the absence of any statutory provision permitting it. Lord Lindley said that the problem of how to adapt legal proceedings to unincorporated societies consisting of . .
CitedRegina v Clerk to Croydon Justices ex parte Chief Constable of Kent QBD 1989
A partnership or an unincorporated association could be registered as a fine defaulter if it failed to pay a fixed penalty arising from its ownership of a motor vehicle; that was because the statutory definition of defaulter depended on the use of . .
CitedDavey v Shawcroft 1948
The court was asked whether an agent of the committee of an unincorporated association, who was personally responsible for a breach of the licence terms, was properly convicted.
Held: Lord Goddard CJ said that section 19 meant that an . .
CitedAttorney-General v Able and Others QBD 28-Apr-1983
The Attorney General sought a declaration as to whether it would be the crime of aiding and abetting or counselling and procuring suicide, to distribute a booklet published by the respondent which described various effective ways of committing . .

Cited by:

CitedBoyle, Regina (On the Application of) v Haverhill Pub Watch and Others Admn 8-Oct-2009
The claimant had been banned from public houses under the Haverhill Pub Watch scheme. He now sought judicial review of a decision to extend his ban for a further two years. The Scheme argued that it was not a body amenable to judicial review, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Company, Environment

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.273131

Re Portman Insurance Plc: ChD 23 Nov 2016

Part 8 claim form for certification under Article 25(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 on the Statute for a European Company (SE) (‘the SE Regulation’), which came into effect on 8 October 2001, conclusively attesting to the completion of pre-merger acts and formalities.

Jones Reg
[2016] EWHC 2994 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Company, European

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.571986

Dowling And Others v Minister for Finance: ECJ 8 Nov 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Regulation (EU) No 407/2010 – European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism – Implementing Decision 2011/77/EU – European Union financial assistance to Ireland – Recapitalisation of national banks – Company law – Second Directive 77/91/EEC – Articles 8, 25 and 29 – Recapitalisation of a bank by means of judicial direction order – Increase in share capital without general meeting decision and without the shares issued being offered on a pre-emptive basis to existing shareholders – Issue of new shares at a price lower than their nominal value

C-41/15, [2016] EUECJ C-41/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:836
Bailii, WLRD
Regulation (EU) No 407/2010
European

Banking, Company

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.571269

John Shaw and Sons (Salford) Ltd v Shaw: 1935

The members of a company cannot interfere with the decisions of the trustees and directors unless they amend the articles to enable them to do so.

[1935] 2 KB 113, [1935] All ER 456
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedLehtimaki and Others v Cooper SC 29-Jul-2020
Charitable Company- Directors’ Status and Duties
A married couple set up a charitable foundation to assist children in developing countries. When the marriage failed an attempt was made to establish a second foundation with funds from the first, as part of W leaving the Trust. Court approval was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.652993

Polly Peck International Plc v Nadir (No 2): CA 19 Mar 1992

Appeal against the grant of a Mareva injunction.
Lord Donaldson MR said: ‘I therefore turn to the principles underlying the jurisdiction. (1) So far as it lies in their power, the Courts will not permit the course of justice to be frustrated by a defendant taking action, the purpose of which is to render nugatory or less effective any judgment or order which the plaintiff may therefore obtain. (2) It is not the purpose of a Mareva injunction to prevent a defendant acting as he would have acted in the absence of a claim against him. Whilst a defendant who is a natural person can and should be enjoined from indulging in a spending spree undertakes with the intention of dissipating or reducing his assets before the day of judgment, he cannot be required to reduce his ordinary standard of living with a view to putting by sums to satisfy a judgment which may or may not be give in the future. Equally no defendant whether a natural or a juridical person, can be enjoined in terms which will prevent him from carrying on his business in the ordinary way or from meeting his debts or other obligations as they come due prior to judgment being given in the action. (3) Justice requires that defendant by free to incur and discharge obligations in respect of professional advice and assistance in resisting the plaintiff’s claims. (4) It is not the purpose of a Mareva injunction to render the plaintiff a secured creditor, although this may be a result if the defendant offers a third party guarantee or bond in order to avoid such an injunction being imposed. (5) The approach called for by the decision in American Cyanamid Co. v. Ethicon Ltd[1975] UKHL 1; (1975) 1 All ER. 504, (1975) AC 396 has, as such, no application to the grant of refusal injunction which proceeds on principles which are quite different from those applicable to other interlocutory injunctions.’

Lord Donaldson MR, Stocker, Scott LJJ
[1992] EWCA Civ 3, [1992] 4 All ER 769, [1993] BCLC 187, [1992] 2 Lloyds Rep 238
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See AlsoPolly Peck International Plc v Nadir and Others CA 17-Mar-1993
For a bank to be sued for breach of trust after receipt of funds, it was not necessary to show that the bank knew of the fraud, but rather that it knew the funds were trust funds, and that they were being misapplied. A Mareva injunction should be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company

Updated: 22 January 2022; Ref: scu.262623

In re Bird Precision Bellows Ltd: CA 1986

The company which was formed to combine one party’s expertise in the manufacturing of precision bellows with the general experience of two others in financial, commercial and industrial matters. For several years the company’s affairs had worked smoothly and prospered until in a spirit of mutual recrimination, at an extraordinary general meeting two of the directors, the plaintiff minority shareholders were removed. The majority consented to an order to purchase the minority interests, and the parties asked the court to settle the price. The judge had ordered payment of the value of the shares pro rata, without deduction of the usual element for the fact that they were minority shareholdings. The majority appealed.
Held: In acting under the Act, the judge was exercising an unfettered discretion. He had only to do what he thought just and equitable in the circumstances to remedy the fault. The appropriate remedy was one which would ‘put right and cure for the future the unfair prejudice which the petitioner has suffered at the hands of the other shareholders of the company.’ He had properly allowed for the fact that the business had developed from a quasi-partnership. The fact that the order was made by consent created no inference that an open market value would be used.

Oliver LJ
[1986] Ch 658, [1985] 3 All ER 523
Companies Act 1985 75(3) 74(4)(d)
England and Wales
Citing:
AppliedDean v Prince CA 1954
The court had criticised an auditors’ valuation of a company’s shares.
Held: The criticism was not correct. However. if the court was satisfied that the valuation was made under a mistake, it would not be binding on the parties.
Denning . .
Appeal fromIn re Bird Precision Bellows Ltd ChD 1984
The court considered the method of valuation of a minority shareholding in a forced purchase by the other shareholders. Nourse J said: ‘I would expect that in a majority of cases where purchase orders are made under section 75 in relation to . .

Cited by:
CitedCVC/Opportunity Equity Partners Limited and Opportunity Invest II Limited v Luis Roberto Demarco Almeida PC 21-Mar-2002
(Cayman Islands) The respondent was a minority shareholder. An offer was made to buy out his interest. He petitioned for the winding up of the company on the just and equitable ground. The claimants obtained an injunction to prevent him doing so, . .
CitedGrace v Biagioli and others CA 4-Nov-2005
The petitioner complained that he had first been removed as director, and that the remaining directors had misdescribed the company’s profits and paid those profits to themselves as management expenses and in breach of a resolution requiring an . .
CitedG v G and Another FdNI 25-Oct-2003
There had been a long but argumentative marriage, and the parties disputed distribution of the assets on an ancillary relief application.
Held: The husband could not claim to discount shareholdings as a minority shareholding where he also . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company

Updated: 22 January 2022; Ref: scu.182784

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 to seek damages against advisers to a limited company, where the loss claimed was over and above that suffered by the company. Damages for distress should not normally be awarded in an action for breach of contract. The public interests in the claimant bringing one action to recover all his losses remained appropriate, but must not be applied mechanically. A settlement in favour of the company, need not release the defendant from an action by the shareholder. Asking whether a plea raised or an issue challenged amounted to an abuse of process required a broad, merits-based judgment which takes account of the public and private interests involved and also takes account of all the facts of the case, focusing attention on the crucial question whether, in all the circumstances, a party is misusing or abusing the process of the court by seeking to raise before it the issue which could have been raised before. As one cannot comprehensively list all possible forms of abuse, so one cannot formulate any hard and fast rule to determine whether, on given facts, abuse is to be found or not . . It is preferable to ask whether in all the circumstances a party’s conduct is an abuse than to ask whether the conduct is an abuse and then, if it is, to ask whether the abuse is excused or justified by special circumstances.
Lord Hutton said: ‘where a shareholder is personally owed a duty of care by a defendant and a breach of that duty causes him loss, he is not debarred from recovering damages because the defendant owed a separate and similar duty of care to the company, provided that the loss suffered by the shareholder is separate and distinct from the loss suffered by the company. ‘
Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘But Henderson v. Henderson abuse of process, as now understood, although separate and distinct from cause of action estoppel and issue estoppel, has much in common with them. The underlying public interest is the same: that there should be finality in litigation and that a party should not be twice vexed in the same matter. This public interest is reinforced by the current emphasis on efficiency and economy in the conduct of litigation, in the interests of the parties and the public as a whole. The bringing of a claim or the raising of a defence in later proceedings may, without more, amount to abuse if the court is satisfied (the onus being on the party alleging abuse) that the claim or defence should have been raised in the earlier proceedings if it was to be raised at all. I would not accept that it is necessary, before abuse may be found, to identify any additional element such as a collateral attack on a previous decision or some dishonesty, but where those elements are present the later proceedings will be much more obviously abusive, and there will rarely be a finding of abuse unless the later proceeding involves what the court regards as unjust harassment of a party. It is, however, wrong to hold that because a matter could have been raised in early proceedings it should have been, so as to render the raising of it in later proceedings necessarily abusive. That is to adopt too dogmatic an approach to what should in my opinion be a broad, merits-based judgment which takes account of the public and private interests involved and also takes account of all the facts of the case, focusing attention on the crucial question whether, in all the circumstances, a party is misusing or abusing the process of the court by seeking to raise before it the issue which could have been raised before.’

Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Goff of Chieveley Lord Cooke of Thorndon Lord Hutton Lord Millett
Gazette 05-Jan-2001, Times 20-Dec-2000, Gazette 22-Feb-2001, [2000] UKHL 65, [2001] 2 WLR 72, [2001] 1 All ER 481, [2002] 2 AC 31
House of Lords, Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
ExplainedHenderson v Henderson 20-Jul-1843
Abuse of Process and Re-litigation
The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings.
Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state the rule . .
ApprovedGleeson v J Wippell and Co Ltd ChD 1977
The court considered the circumstances giving rise to a plea of res judicata, and proposed a test of privity in cases which did not fall into any recognised category. ‘Second, it seems to me that the sub-stratum of the doctrine is that a man ought . .
CitedGreenhalgh v Mallard CA 1943
The court said of certain pre-emption provisions: ‘in the case of the restriction of transfer of shares I think it is right for the court to remember that a share, being personal property, is prima facie transferable, although the conditions of the . .
CitedYat Tung Investment Co Ltd v Dao Heng Bank Ltd PC 1975
Restraint of Second Action as Abuse
Hong Kong – A company purchased a property from the defendant bank who had taken it back into possession from a former borrower. The company itself fell into arrears, the property was taken back again and resold. The company sought a declaration . .
CitedAmalgamated Investment and Property Co Ltd (in Liq) v Texas Commerce International Bank Ltd CA 1982
The court explained the nature of an estoppel by convention.
Lord Denning MR said: ‘The doctrine of estoppel is one of the most flexible and useful in the armoury of the law. But it has become overloaded with cases. That is why I have not gone . .
CitedBrisbane City Council v Attorney General for Queensland PC 1978
Lord Wilberforce approved Somervell LJ’s words in Greenhalgh: ‘This is the true basis of the doctrine in Henderson v Henderson and it ought only to be applied when the facts are such as to amount to an abuse: otherwise there is a danger of a party . .
CitedHunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police HL 19-Nov-1981
No collateral attack on Jury findigs.
An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many . .
CitedBragg v Oceanus Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd CA 1982
The court considered the ability to prevent relitigation of issues already decided. The Court identified some of the limits of the abuse jurisdiction. Kerr LJ said: ‘To take the authorities first, it is clear that an attempt to relitigate in another . .
CitedAshmore v British Coal Corporation CA 1990
The plaintiff was one of many female employees who complained to the industrial tribunal that she was paid less by the defendant than her male counterparts. Sample cases were selected for trial and the others stayed pending a decision. It was an . .
CitedVervaeke v Smith HL 1983
A petitioner for a decree of nullity of an English marriage in the English courts on the grounds of lack of consent to the marriage, having failed to obtain such decree, obtained a declaration from the Belgian court that the English marriage, was . .
CitedHouse of Spring Gardens v Waite CA 1991
The principle of abuse of process is capable of applying where the relevant earlier proceedings have taken place before a foreign court (Ireland). In this case the defendants argued that the judgment obtained in Ireland had been obtained . .
CitedArnold v National Westminster Bank Plc HL 1991
Tenants invited the court to construe the terms of a rent review provision in the sub-underlease under which they held premises. The provision had been construed in a sense adverse to them in earlier proceedings before Walton J, but they had been . .
CitedTalbot v Berkshire County Council CA 23-Mar-1993
In a motor accident, both driver and passenger were injured. The passenger sued the driver. The driver’s insurers, without notice to the driver, made a third party claim against the Berkshire County Council, claiming contribution as between joint . .
CitedC (A Minor) v Hackney London Borough Council CA 10-Nov-1995
The mother had claimed in damages for the injuries to her health from the landlord authority’s failure to repair. Her child then brought a subsequent action in respect of his own injuries. The authority claimed the action should be stopped as res . .
CitedBarrow v Bankside Members Agency Limited CA 10-Nov-1995
Mr Barrow was a member of an action group which had successfully sued a number of members’ agents for negligent underwriting. Having substantially succeeded, but recovered only a proportion of the damages he had claimed, Mr Barrow issued fresh . .
CitedManson v Vooght and others CA 12-Jun-1998
The plaintiff had sued administrative receivers of a company of which he had been managing director and principal shareholder in a 1990 action which culminated in a judgment adverse to him in 1993. Other proceedings and other judgments, also in . .
CitedBradford and Bingley Building Society v Seddon and Hancock; Walsh and Rhodes (Trading As Hancocks (a Firm) CA 11-Mar-1999
There was an unsatisfied judgment on a claim by a defendant in an earlier action against a third party. In a subsequent action against the defendant the latter issued third party proceedings against the original and different third parties.
CitedLee v Sheard CA 1956
The negligence of a car driver resulted in an injury to the plaintiff who was one of two directors and shareholders of a limited company and did outside work of buying and selling linen goods for it. As a consequence of the accident the plaintiff . .
CitedPrudential 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 . .
ApprovedR P Howard Ltd and Witchell v Woodman Matthews and Co (a firm) 1983
The solicitor defendant knew that the company was a family company effectively run by Mr Witchell from whom they received their instructions. The question raised was as to the duty of the solicitor to company and director.
Held: There is no . .
CitedGeorge Fischer (Great Britain) Ltd v Multi Construction Ltd., Dexion Ltd. (third party) 1995
The plaintiff contracted with the defendant for the defendant to install equipment on the premises of one of the claimant’s subsidiaries. The equipment was to be used by the subsidiary. The equipment was defective and damage was suffered by the . .
CitedChristensen v Scott 1996
(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 . .
CitedBarings Plc and Another v Coopers and Lybrand (A Firm) and Others ChD 13-Aug-1996
The need to reach one conclusion justified service of proceedings overseas on a firm’s partners, where there was a genuine issue to be decided . .
CitedBarings Plc and Another v Coopers and Lybrand (A Firm) and Others CA 6-Dec-1996
Whether a duty of care exists from the auditors of a subsidiary, towards its parent company is a triable issue. . .
CitedStein 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 . .
CitedGerber Garment Technology Inc v Lectra Systems Limited Lectra Systemes SA CA 18-Dec-1996
The plaintiffs claimed damages for patent infringement. Some of the lost profits for which the plaintiff company claimed damages were suffered by subsidiary companies in which it held all the shares.
Held: When a shareholder has a cause of . .
CitedAddis v Gramophone Company Limited HL 26-Jul-1909
Mr Addis was wrongfully and contumeliously dismissed from his post as the defendant’s manager in Calcutta. He sought additional damages for the manner of his dismissal.
Held: It did not matter whether the claim was under wrongful dismissal. . .
CitedWatts and Co v Morrow CA 30-Jul-1991
The plaintiff had bought a house on the faith of the defendant’s report that there were only limited defects requiring repair. In fact the defects were much more extensive. The defendant surveyor appealed against an award of damages after his . .
CitedRuxley Electronics and Construction Ltd v Forsyth HL 29-Jun-1995
Damages on Construction not as Agreed
The appellant had contracted to build a swimming pool for the respondent, but, after agreeing to alter the specification to construct it to a certain depth, in fact built it to the original lesser depth, Damages had been awarded to the house owner . .
CitedTaylors Fashions Ltd v Liverpool Victoria Trustees Co Ltd ChD 1981
The fundamental principle that equity is concerned to prevent unconscionable conduct permeates all the elements of the doctrine of estoppel. In the light of the more recent cases, the principle ‘requires a very much broader approach which is . .
CitedHenderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd HL 25-Jul-1994
Lloyds Agents Owe Care Duty to Member; no Contract
Managing agents conducted the financial affairs of the Lloyds Names belonging to the syndicates under their charge. It was alleged that they managed these affairs with a lack of due careleading to enormous losses.
Held: The assumption of . .
CitedHobbs v London and South Western Railway Co 1875
The court considered an application for damages for inconvenience in a breach of contract case: ‘for the mere inconvenience, such as annoyance and loss of temper, or vexation, or for being disappointed in a particular thing which you have set your . .
CitedIn re Windsor Steam Coal Co. (1901) Ltd 1929
The courts look more favourably on applications by gratuitous trustees than on those by paid trustees. In a company winding up the liquidator may be liable to the company for negligence on his part in making a compromise. . .
CitedHayes and Another v Dodd CA 7-Jul-1988
The court considered what damages might be paid for inconvenience and distress. . .
CitedIn re Home and Colonial Insurance Co Ltd 1930
. .
CitedLips Maritime Corp. v President of India PC 1988
Lord Brandon of Oakbrook: ‘There is no such thing as a cause of action in damages for late payment of damages. The only remedy which the law affords for delay in paying damages is the discretionary award of interest pursuant to statute.’ . .
CitedBailey v Bullock 1950
The court awarded damages against solicitors for the inconvenience to the plaintiff of having to live in an overcrowded house. . .
CitedMalik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI); Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International HL 12-Jun-1997
Allowance of Stigma Damages
The employees claimed damages, saying that the way in which their employer had behaved during their employment had led to continuing losses, ‘stigma damages’ after the termination.
Held: It is an implied term of any contract of employment that . .
CitedWalker and others v Stones and others CA 19-Jul-2000
Beneficiaries under a trust sought damages from a solicitor trustee, and the firm of which he was a partner.
Held: Where a trustee acted in breach of trust in a claimed belief that he was acting in the interests of the beneficiaries, but no . .
CitedHeron International v Lord Grade, Associated Communications Corp. Plc. and Others CA 1983
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 . .
CitedSheriff v Klyne Tugs (Lowestoft) Ltd CA 24-Jun-1999
The Claimant complained to an industrial tribunal of unlawful racial discrimination. He had suffered a nervous breakdown and was certified as unfit for work due to stress. The employer had compromised all claims justiciable by the Employment . .
Appeal fromJohnson 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 by:
CitedGiles v Rhind ChD 24-Jul-2001
The company had suffered losses after an alleged breach of confidence by a director. The applicant sought to recover his losses as a shareholder, after the company became unable or unwilling itself to pursue an action to recover the losses it had . .
CitedFarley v Skinner HL 11-Oct-2001
The claimant sought damages from the defendant surveyor. He had asked the defendant whether the house he was to buy was subject to aircraft noise. After re-assurance, he bought the house. The surveyor was wrong and negligent. A survey would not . .
CitedBarings Plc and Another v Coopers and Lybrand and Others; etc ChD 23-Nov-2001
The applicant company employed a trader who, through manipulation of trading systems ran up losses sufficient to bankrupt the company. They sought recovery from the defendant auditors for failing to spot the mis-trading and prevent continuing . .
AppliedDr H Platt, NHS Executive HQ, Department Of Health v R Chaudhary and Others, R Chaudhary and others EAT 20-Dec-2001
The Authority and other respondents appealed a refusal to strike out the applicant’s claim as an abuse of process, on the basis that other proceedings were current between the same parties at another tribunal. Abuse of process is distinct from cause . .
CitedTime Group Limited v Computer 2000 Distribution Limited and IBM United Kingdom Limited TCC 4-Feb-2002
Computers had been supplied by the second defendant to the claimant and first defendant at different times for exclusive distribution in the UK. Defects were alleged. The case concerned applications made for dismissal of a case as an abuse of . .
CitedGiles v Rhind CA 17-Oct-2002
An action by a company under a shareholder’s agreement was compromised. The other shareholder now sought to commence an action against the party in breach for his personal losses. The defendant argued that the company’s compromise was binding also . .
CitedMotorola Credit Corporation v Uzan and others (No 2) CA 12-Jun-2003
World-wide freezing orders had been made under the 1982 Act. The defendants were members of a Turkish family with substantial business interests in the telecommunications industry. In breach of orders made in the US some defendants had sought to . .
CitedChagos 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 . .
CitedChappell v Somers and Blake (a Firm) ChD 8-Jul-2003
The will gave the deceased’s property to the local church. The claimant executrix instructed the defendants to administer the estate, but later terminated the retainer saying that they had done nothing for many years, depriving the estate of rents. . .
CitedWiltshire v Powell and others CA 7-May-2004
The claimant sought a declaration as to the ownership of an aircraft. Saying he had bought it in good faith from E H and S, who in turn similarly claimed to have bought it from Ebbs. The defendant had obtained a judgment that he was owner as against . .
CitedCelador Productions Ltd v Melville ChD 21-Oct-2004
The applicants each alleged breach of copyright and misuse of confidential information in the format of the television program ‘Who wants to be a Millionaire’. The defendant appealed a refusal to strike out the claim. It was not contended that no . .
CitedCollins Stewart Ltd and Another v The Financial Times Ltd QBD 20-Oct-2004
The claimants sought damages for defamation. The claimed that the article had caused very substantial losses (andpound;230 million) to them by affecting their market capitalisation value. The defendant sought to strike out that part of the claim. . .
CitedHormel Foods Corporation v Antilles Landscape Investments NV ChD 24-Jan-2005
The claimant had alread challenged the validity of the defendant’s registered trade mark, but sought to do so now on grounds which could have been advanced in the earlier case. The claimant owned the trade mark ‘SPAM’ for canned meats, and the . .
CitedGanesmoorthy v Ganesmoorthy CA 16-Oct-2002
The parties had divorced. The wife alleged a serious assault against her husband, and instructed a claims firm to recover damages from him. Her ancillary relief claim in the divorce was compromised with her having sought to rely upon the assault, . .
CitedWeir and others v Secretary of State for Transport and Another ChD 14-Oct-2005
The claimants were shareholders in Railtrack. They complained that the respondent had abused his position to place the company into receivership so as to avoid paying them compensation on a repurchase of the shares. Mr Byers was accused of ‘targeted . .
CitedDavid v Honeywell Normalair-Garrett Ltd QBD 2-Mar-2006
The claimant sought damages for personal injuries arising from exposure to depleted uranium whilst working for the defendant. An earlier claim had been compromised. The defendant denied liabilty and relied also on the compromise.
Held: The . .
CitedMeretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others ChD 30-Jan-2006
The applicant challenged the exercise of a power of sale under a mortgage, saying that the mortgagee’s purposes included purposes not those under the mortgage. The parties had been involved in an attempted development of a penthouse.
Held: The . .
CitedSpecial Effects Ltd v L’Oreal Sa and Another CA 12-Jan-2007
The defendants had opposed the grant of the trade mark which they were now accused of infringing. The claimants said that having failed at the opposition stage, they were now estopped from challenging the validity of the mark.
Held: It was not . .
CitedMcBride v The Body Shop International Plc QBD 10-Jul-2007
The claimant sought damages for libel in an internal email written by her manager, accusing her of being a compulsive liar. The email had not been disclosed save in Employment Tribunal proceedings, and the claimant sought permission to use the email . .
CitedAldi Stores Ltd v WSP Group Plc and others CA 28-Nov-2007
Aldi appealed against an order striking out as an abuse of process its claims against the defendant on a construction dispute. The defendant said the claims should have been brought as part of earlier proceedings.
Held: The appeal succeeded. . .
CitedNelson v Greening and Sykes (Builders) Ltd CA 18-Dec-2007
The builders had obtained a charging order for the costs awarded to them in extensive litigation, and a third party costs order but without the third party having opportunity to test the bill delivered. They had agreed to sell land to the defendant, . .
MentionedThe Thomas and Agnes Carvel Foundation v Carvel and Another ChD 11-Jun-2007
The husband and wife had made mutual wills in the US with an express agreement not to make later alterations or dispositions without the agreement of the other or at all after the first death. The wife survived, but having lost the first will made a . .
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v Kufner ComC 10-Oct-2008
barclays_kufnerComC2008
The bank sought summary judgment under a guarantee to secure a loan to purchase a luxury yacht which was to be hired out in business. The loan had been charged against the yacht, but when the yacht was re-registered, the bank failed to re-establish . .
CitedCampbell v Leeds United Association Football Misc 3-Apr-2009
The claimant sought damages for psychiatric injury suffered when working for the defendant who replied that the matter had already been litigated in her claims in the Employment Tribunal, and that a cause of action estoppel applied.
Held: The . .
CitedSpecialist Group International Ltd v Deakin and Another CA 23-May-2001
Law upon res judicata – action estoppel and issue estoppel and the underlying policy interest whereby there is finality in litigation and litigants are not vexed twice on the same matter.
(May LJ) ‘the authorities taken as a whole tend to . .
CitedStuart v Goldberg and Linde (a firm) CA 17-Jan-2008
The claimant appealed against orders preventing him from suing his former solicitors in respect of heads of claim which the court said should have been included in earlier proceedings.
Held: When deciding whether a claim was an abuse of . .
CitedWalbrook Trustees (Jersey) Ltd and Others v Fattal and Others CA 8-Apr-2009
The parties had been involved in serial disputes regarding the management of leasehold apartments. It was now objected that the current case was an abuse of process.
Held: The appeal against the stay succeeded. The new case had been flagged up . .
CitedCheltenham Borough Council v Laird QBD 15-Jun-2009
The council sought damages saying that their former chief executive had not disclosed her history of depressive illness when applying for her job.
Held: The replies were not dishonest as the form could have been misconstrued. The claim failed. . .
CitedWebster v Sandersons Solicitors (A Firm) CA 31-Jul-2009
The claimant apealed against refusal of permission to amend his claim for negligence against his former solicitors by adding claims from 1993 and 1994 . .
CitedMatalan Retail Ltd v Revenue and Customs ChD 5-Aug-2009
The taxpayer imported swimwear for sale. The respondent had incorrectly indicated that such swimwear had one classification. The claimant sought to prevent the respondent reclassifying the goods, saying that they had made given binding tariff . .
CitedBudejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser-Busch Inc CA 20-Oct-2009
The parties had long disputed the use of the trade marks ‘Bud’ and ‘Budweiser’ for their beers. The claimant now said that the defendants had made an abusive registration under the 1994 Act, by requesting a declaration that the registration by the . .
CitedHenley v Bloom CA 9-Mar-2010
Different claims allowed re-litigation
The parties had had long standing disputes as landlord and tenant. They were at one point settled, but the tenant claimed again, and the landlord sought to strike out the claim as an abuse of process, saying the claimant had failed to comply with . .
CitedCalzaghe v Warren QBD 20-Jan-2010
The claimant boxer had secured judgement for fight fees from a company operated by the respondent manager and promoter. After the judgment the defendant had put the company into administration. The claimant now sought payment from the defendant . .
CitedFoster v Bon Groundwork Ltd EAT 17-Mar-2011
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissal
In April 2009, the Claimant, who was then 77 years of age, was employed by the Respondent, when he was laid off without pay. While still being employed by . .
CitedWahab v Khan and Others; In re Abdus Sattar Sheikh deceased ChD 12-Apr-2011
The claimant had asked the court to revoke the probate granted in his brother’s estate. He appealed now against a strike out of his request. He alleged that the will was a forgery. The executor’s and defendants were not relations of the deceased, . .
CitedSarwar v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc (Rev 1) ChD 27-Jul-2011
The claimant appealed against a finding of indebtedness to the bank. He had said at trial that the bank had been charging interest at 25%. The bank denied this, but after trial it became clear that he had been correct. The bank argued for abuse of . .
CitedHi-Lite Electrical Ltd v Wolseley UK Ltd QBD 17-Jul-2009
The claimant sought a contribution from the defendant towards its liability for a fire at its premises, as found in earlier proceedings against the now claimant. The defendant had filed a defence merely not admitting, and not denying, responsibility . .
CitedBocacina Ltd v Boca Cafes Ltd IPEC 14-Oct-2013
The claimant alleged passing off by the defendant’s use of the name ‘Boca Bistro Cafe’, and subsequently ‘Bica Bistro Cafe’
Held: Where the defendant had changed its trading style during the proceedings it was possible, if the claimant . .
CitedGladman Commercial Properties v Fisher Hargreaves Proctor and Others CA 14-Nov-2013
The claimant appealed against the striking out of his claims for fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation as to the suitability for deveopment of two former fire service properties. The court had said that a settlement with co-tortfeasors operated . .
CitedJoint Stock Company (Aeroflot-Russian Airlines) v Berezovsky and Another CA 16-Jan-2014
The appellant had judgments obtained in Russia against the respondent. It now appealed against a refusal of enforcement of those judgments based upon the ground that there was a complete defence to the recognition and enforcement of the judgments . .
CitedVirgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Ltd SC 3-Jul-2013
Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd sought to recover damages exceeding 49,000,000 pounds for the infringement of a European Patent which did not exist in the form said to have been infringed. The Technical Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office had . .
CitedStarlight Shipping Co v Allianz Marine and Aviation Versicherungs Ag and Others CA 20-Dec-2012
The Alexander T, owned by the appellant and insured by the respondents was a total loss. The insurers resisted payment, the appellant came to allege improperly, and the parties had settled the claim on full payment under a Tomlin Order. The owners . .
See AlsoJohnson v Gore Wood and Co (A Firm) QBD 20-Feb-2002
The claimant alleged negligence by the defendant solicitors. . .
See AlsoJohnson 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 . .
See AlsoWilliam John Henry Johnson v Gore Wood and Co CA 3-Dec-2003
. .
See AlsoWilliam John Henry Johnson v Gore Wood and Co CA 27-Jan-2004
The defendant had made a substantial payment into court in protracted proceedings.
Held: The comparison between the payment in and the eventual amount of damages awarded should be assessed on the basis of the damages calculated as at the date . .
DiscussedInternational Leisure Ltd and Another v First National Trustee Company UK Ltd and Others ChD 16-Jul-2012
The court was asked as to the ambit and limits of the rule against reflective loss as discussed in Johnson v Gore Wood and Co [2002] 2 AC 1. On this occasion the issue was whether the rule debared a secured creditor of a company who had suffered . .
CitedChristou and Another v London Borough of Haringey EAT 21-Feb-2012
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal
The Appellants, the social worker responsible for the care of Baby P and her team manager, were held not to have been unfairly dismissed by Haringey for . .
CitedChristou and Another v London Borough of Haringey CA 12-Mar-2013
The appellants had been social workers involved in the care systems responsible for a child, baby P, who had been killed by his family. They challenged their dismissals. . .
CitedMichael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Sinclair and Another CA 13-Jan-2017
The appellant company sought to recover assets which, it said, had been acquired by a former partner in breach of his obligations under the partnership agreement, but which had been taken in the names of some of the respondents. There had been an . .
CitedArcadia Group Ltd and Others v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 8-Feb-2019
Claimant’s application for leave to withdraw request for injunction to prevent publication of stories regarding matters subject to non-disclosure agreements.
Held: Granted. An junction had been granted, but Lord Hain had disclosed protected . .
CitedMoorjani and Others v Durban Estates Ltd and Another TCC 15-May-2019
Allegations of breach of landlords’ repairing obligations – defendants’ strike out application.
Held: ‘ the critical question is whether this second action is based on the same cause, or causes, of action, and not whether it pleads the same . .
CitedDexter Ltd v Vlieland-Boddy CA 2003
The court discussed the significance of Johnson v Gore Wood.
Clarke LJ said: ‘The principles to be derived from the authorities, of which by far the most important is Johnson v Gore Wood and Co [2002] 2 AC 1, can be summarised as follows:
CitedSpicer v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis QBD 7-Jun-2019
The claimant said that he had been wrongly described on the defendant’s website as one of two people guilty of causing death by dangerous driving. He had been found guilty only of a much less serious offence. The court now considered the meanings of . .
CitedSpicer v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis QBD 6-Jul-2020
The claimant alleged defamation. He had been acquitted of a criminal offence and said that material published by the defendant continued to imply or assert his guilt of the offence. The defendant argued truth. The claimant now sought a strike out of . .
CitedCo-Operative Group v Virk (Valuation Officer) UTLC 22-Oct-2020
Abuse of Process in Rating Alterations
Rating – Alteration of Rating List – validity of proposal challenging alteration to list made by VO to give effect to agreement – application to strike out appeals from the Valuation Tribunal for Wales and Valuation Tribunal for England – res . .
CitedTakhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others SC 20-Mar-2019
The claimant appellant alleged that properties she owned were transferred to the first defendant under undue influence or other unconscionable conduct by the second and third defendants. The claim was dismissed. Three years later she claimed to set . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Professional Negligence, Company

Leading Case

Updated: 21 January 2022; Ref: scu.159100

Redgrave v Hurd: CA 1881

The plaintiff, an elderly solicitor wishing to retire, advertised for someone to enter into partnership with him and to buy his house. The defendant responded to the advertisement and negotiations followed, in which the plaintiff stated that the practice brought him in about 300 pounds a year. In fact it did not bring in anything like that amount. The parties entered into partnership and into a separate contract for the sale of the house, which made no reference to the business. The defendant paid a deposit and was let into possession. On discovering that the practice was not worth what the plaintiff had said, the defendant gave up possession and refused to complete the purchase. The plaintiff sued for specific performance; the defendant counterclaimed for rescission of the contract and damages for deceit. The plaintiff succeeded at first instance.
Held: In the absence of proof that he had in fact become aware of the falsity, he was entitled to relief. To claim that a misrepresentation was corrected before the contract was entered into, it is not sufficient to say that he would have discovered the true position if he had acted with all due care. ‘Nothing can be plainer, I take it, on the authorities in equity than that the effect of false representation is not got rid of on the ground that the person to whom it was made has been guilty of negligence. One of the most familiar instances in modern times is where men issue a prospectus in which they make false statements of the contract made before the formation of a company, and then say that the contracts themselves may be inspected at the offices of the solicitor. It has always been held that those who accepted those false statements as true were not deprived of their remedy merely because they neglected to go and look at the contract. Another instance with which we are familiar is where a vendor makes a false statement as to the contents of a lease, as, for instance, that it contains no covenant preventing the carrying on of the trade which the purchaser is know by the vendor to be desirous of carrying on upon the property. Although the lease itself might be produced at the sale, or might have been open to the inspection of the purchaser long previously to the sale, it has been repeatedly held that the vendor cannot be allowed to say, ‘You were not entitled to give credit to my statement’. It is not sufficient, therefore, to say that the purchaser had the opportunity of investigating the real state of the case, but did not avail himself of that opportunity.’

Sir George Jessel MR
[1881] 20 ChD 1, [1881] UKLawRpCh 251, (1881-1882) 20 ChD 1
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedAssicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC) CA 13-Nov-2002
Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal
The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. . .
CitedWeir and others v Secretary of State for Transport and Another ChD 14-Oct-2005
The claimants were shareholders in Railtrack. They complained that the respondent had abused his position to place the company into receivership so as to avoid paying them compensation on a repurchase of the shares. Mr Byers was accused of ‘targeted . .
CitedHalpern 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 . .
CitedHayward v Zurich Insurance Company Plc CA 31-Mar-2015
The claimant sought damages alleging his back had been injured at work. The insurers accepted liability but said that the claimant had exaggerated the extent of his injury. The claim was settled, but later a neighbour of the claimants said that the . .
CitedHayward v Zurich Insurance Company Plc SC 27-Jul-2016
The claimant had won a personal injury case and the matter had been settled with a substantial payout by the appellant insurance company. The company now said that the claimant had grossly exaggerated his injury, and indeed wasfiully recovered at . .
CitedTakhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others SC 20-Mar-2019
The claimant appellant alleged that properties she owned were transferred to the first defendant under undue influence or other unconscionable conduct by the second and third defendants. The claim was dismissed. Three years later she claimed to set . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Contract

Updated: 21 January 2022; Ref: scu.187267

Mubarak v Mubarak: FD 23 Oct 2000

The court had made an order for payment by H to W on the divorce, and was now asked whether W could take jewelry held by H’s company in part satisfaction of the capital sums due.

Bodey J
[2000] EWHC 466 (Fam), [2001] 1 FLR 673, [2001] Fam Law 177
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBen 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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Company

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.567911

Rahman v Miah: ChD 19 Oct 2007

The parties had been in business together running an Indian takeaway. The defendant bought the freehold and and purported to terminate the partnership, excluding the claimant from possession. The claimant sought orders as to the ownership of the freehold on trust for the partnership, and for accounst and otherwise.
Held: The defendant had hidden his purchase of the freehold from the claimant, who had not consented to its purchase in the defendant’s sole name. After learning of the purchase, the claimant had persisted with his objection despite delays.

[2007] EWHC 3546 (Ch)
Bailii
Partnership Act 1890 20
England and Wales

Company

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.472690

Re Singh Brothers Contractors (North West) Ltd: ChD 27 Jun 2013

Derivative claim on behalf of the company under section 261 of the Companies Act 2006 against the first defendant, a director of the second defendant, for breach of director’s duty, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of trust. The claimant sought orders for damages, an account, further or other relief and costs. The claimant also sought an order that he be indemnified out of the company’s assets in respect of the legal costs of the derivative claim. It was said that the claimant expected to recover more than andpound;800,000.

Hodge QC Hhj
[2013] EWHC 2138 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Company

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.514959

In Re City Equitable Fire Insurance Company Limited: ChD 1924

The duty of reasonable care expected of a company’s directors is generally said to be that of an ordinary prudent person might be expected to take in the circumstances on his own behalf, with the knowledge and experience of the director concerned. The court discussed the duties of a company director. Romer LJ said: ‘In respect of all duties that, having regard to the exigencies of business, and the articles of association, may properly be left to some other official, a director is, in the absence of grounds for suspicion, justified in trusting that official to perform such duties honestly.’

Romer J
[1925] Ch 407, [1924] 3 All ER 485
England and Wales
Cited by:
No longer good lawEquitable Life Assurance Society v Bowley and others ComC 17-Oct-2003
The claimant sought damages against its former directors for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty. The defendants asked that the claims be struck out.
Held: It was no longer good law that directors might leave the conduct of the company’s . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.187449

In The Matter of RAC Holdings Ltd: ChD 8 Dec 2000

The nature of the membership of the RAC was that it ceased upon death, and that therefore the deceased estate had no interest in the proceeds of a later sale of the company. The share was a personal asset, akin to the membership of many other clubs.

Neuberger J
[2000] 1 BCLC 307
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBruce Peskin; Kevin Milner v John Anderson and Others CA 14-Dec-2000
The Royal Automobile Club (RAC) had been demutualised. The claimants were former members who sought damages from former directors because they had received no benefit. They had ceased to be members before the re-organisation and claimed they should . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.185804

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 and emailed and delivered by hand at the registered offices of the company and at the private address of the owner and a director of the company. All these methods were ineffective as service under English law or Maltese law. The defendants challenged the jurisdiction of the English court, referring to an exclusive jurisdiction clause. Proceedings had been begun in Malta. The respondents denied that serious and grave matters had been alleged so as to bring into play section 402.
Held: The court set aside the order granting permission to serve the defendants out of the jurisdiction, except in relation to the alleged breach by the Company of the funding limits, and refused to grant the injunctions either in the wide form originally sought, or in the modified form suggested in correspondence.

Lawrence Collins J
[2003] EWHC 1798 (Ch), [2004] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 652
Bailii
Companies Act 1985 402
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedThe Abidin Daver HL 1984
The House considered the application of the doctrine of forum conveniens.
Held: A stay of an English action on the ground of forum non conveniens could be resisted on the ground that justice could not be obtained in the otherwise more . .
CitedKonamaneni v Rolls Royce Industrial Power (India) Limited ChD 20-Dec-2001
The claimants founded their action on the assertion that the defendants had been corrupt in obtaining contracts in India. The defendants argued that the English courts had no jurisdiction. The claimants held various small shareholdings in a company . .
CitedMacKinnon v Donaldson, Lufkin and Jenrette Securities Corporation ChD 1986
A plaintiff in an English action had obtained an order against an American bank, served on its London office, requiring production of books and papers at its New York head office.
Held: The court pointed out the distinction between ‘personal . .
CitedPickering v Stephenson 1872
A company’s money should not be expended on disputes between the shareholders. . .
CitedRe Crossmore Electrical and Civil Engineering Ltd 1989
Disputes between shareholders should not be settled with assistance form the funds of the company. . .
CitedRe A Company No 01126 of 1992 1993
Company funds should not be used to support disputes between shareholders. . .
CitedSeaconsar Far East Ltd v Bank Markazi Jomhouri Islami Iran HL 15-Oct-1993
A plaintiff must show that there is a ‘serious issue for trial’ to support and justify an application for overseas service. The standard of proof in respect of the cause of action relied on is whether, on the evidence, there was a serious question . .
CitedThe Sky One 1988
RSC O.11, r.6(3)) did not provide exclusive methods of service. Service might be effected by private means rather than through the methods set out there, provided always that nothing was done in the country where service was to be effected which was . .
CitedKnauf UK GmbH v British Gypsum Ltd and Another CA 24-Oct-2001
Permission was sought to use alternative service to serve proceedings on a company. There was no exceptional difficulty in ordinary service, but the claimant wanted to ensure that a claim was heard within the UK jurisdiction, and expected that he . .
CitedAnderton v Clwyd County Council (No 2); Bryant v Pech and Another Dorgan v Home Office; Chambers v Southern Domestic Electrical Services Ltd; Cummins v Shell International Manning Services Ltd CA 3-Jul-2002
In each case, the applicant sought to argue that documents which had actually been received on a certain date should not be deemed to have been served on a different day because of the rule.
Held: The coming into force of the Human Rights Act . .
CitedNational Carriers Ltd v Panalpina (Northern) Ltd HL 11-Dec-1980
No Frustration of Lease through loss of access
The tenant’s access to the premises was closed by the local authority because it passed by a derelict and dangerous building. The tenant argued that its tenancy was frustrated.
Held: The lease was not frustrated. The lease had a term of ten . .
CitedThe Chaparral CA 1968
A contract conferred exclusive jurisdiction on the English court as a neutral forum. In the context not only of English and other jurisdiction clauses the court held: ‘In the present case the choice of the parties was the English Court, and . . I . .
CitedAkai Pty Ltd v People’s Insurance Co Ltd 1998
The principles applicable in deciding whether an exclusive jurisdiction clause applies are the same whether the jurisidiction selected is England or Wales or otherwise. . .
CitedImport Export Metro Ltd and Another v Compania Sud Americana De Vapores S A ComC 23-Jan-2003
. .
CitedAttock Cement Co v Romanian Bank for Foreign Trade CA 1989
Where the parties to a contract have agreed to an English forum it would require strong grounds for one of the parties to resist the exercise of jurisdiction by the English court: ‘We should also look with favour on a choice of our own jurisdiction, . .
CitedBritish Aerospace v Dee Howard 1993
Where a contract contained an exclusive jurisdiction clause providing for a case to be tried in the UK, it was relevant that the circumstances which might now suggest a trial elsewhere were perfectly foreseeable at the time of the contract. The new . .
CitedSociete Eram Shipping Company Limited and others v Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corp Ltd, Compagnie Internationale de Navigation HL 12-Jun-2003
The appeal concerned a final third party debt order (formerly a garnishee order). A judgment in France was registered here for enforcement. That jurisdiction was now challenged.
Held: A third party debt order is a proprietary remedy operating . .
CitedCredit Suisse Fides Trust SA v Cuoghi; Credit Suisse Fides Trust SA and Amhurst Brown Colombotti (a Firm) CA 11-Jun-1997
The claimant brought proceedings in Switzerland (a party to the Lugano Convention) against the defendant who was domiciled in England, alleging that he had conspired with one of the claimant’s employees to misappropriate some US$ 21 million. It was . .
CitedREFCO Capital Markets Ltd and Another v Eastern Trading Co, Credit Suisse (First Boston) Ltd and Another CA 17-Jun-1998
An application for Mareva relief was granted under s.25 where proceedings were pending in the US against Lebanese defendants arising out of futures transactions with respect of assets in England. On the application to discharge the order, the lower . .
CitedMotorola Credit Corporation v Uzan and Others CA 26-Jun-2002
A world wide asset freezing order had been made. The defendants sought that it be set aside. Pending the hearing of their application, they sought also delay of their obligation to co-operate in providing full details of their finances.
Held: . .
CitedBabanaft International Co SA v Bassatne CA 30-Jun-1988
The court considered whether the state in which enforcement of a judgment will take place should be the place where the debt is situated upon which it is sought to execute.
Held: There was nothing to preclude English courts from granting . .
CitedCastanho v Brown and Root (UK) Ltd HL 1981
A claim was made for an anti-suit injunction.
Held: The court is reluctant to make orders which would be ineffective to achieve what they set out to do, but the fear that the defendant will not obey an injunction is not a bar to its grant. The . .

Cited by:
CitedBasil Shiblaq v Kahraman Sadikoglu (No 2) ComC 30-Jul-2004
The court considered whether there had been effective service of proceedings on defendants in Turkey. Evidence was given as to the effectiveness of such service in Turkish law.
Held: The defendant’s application to set aside the judgment in . .
CitedNussberger and Another v Phillips and Another (No 4) CA 19-May-2006
A claim was issued in London in December 2004, and then served in part in Switzerland in January 2005. One copy was removed from the bundle by a Swiss official, seeing that it had been marked ‘Nor for service out of the jurisdiction.’ That marking . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Company

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.186465

Re Charnley Davies Ltd (No 2): ChD 1990

An administrator owed a duty to the company over which he was appointed to take reasonable care to obtain the best price that the circumstances, as he reasonably perceived them to be, permitted, including a duty to take reasonable care in choosing the time at which to sell the property. A mortgagee is bound to have regard to the interests of the mortgagor, but he is entitled to give priority to his own interests, and may insist on an immediate sale whether or not that is calculated to realise the best price. An administrator, by contrast, like a liquidator, has no interest of his own to which he may give priority, and must take reasonable care in choosing the time at which to sell the property.
Millett J said: ‘An allegation that the acts complained of are unlawful or infringe the petitioner’s legal rights is not a necessary averment in a s.27 petition. In my judgment it is not a sufficient averment either. The petitioner must allege and prove that they are evidence or instances of the management of the company’s affairs by the administrator in a manner which is unfairly prejudicial to the petitioner’s interests. Unlawful conduct may be relied on for this purpose, and its unlawfulness may have a significant probative value, but it is not the essential factor on which the petitioner’s cause of action depends.
Counsel for the petitioners asked: ‘If misconduct in the management of the company’s affairs does not without more constitute unfairly prejudicial management, what extra ingredient is required?’ In my judgment the distinction between misconduct and unfairly prejudicial management does not lie in the particular acts or omissions of which complaint is made, but in the nature of the complaint and the remedy necessary to meet it. It is a matter of perspective. The metaphor is not a supermarket trolley but a hologram. If the whole gist of the complaint lies in the unlawfulness of the acts or omissions complained of, so that it may be adequately redressed by the remedy provided by law for the wrong, the complaint is one of misconduct simpliciter. There is no need to assume the burden of alleging and proving that the acts or omissions complained of evidence or constitute unfairly prejudicial management of the company’s affairs. It is otherwise if the unlawfulness of the acts or omissions complained of is not the whole gist of the complaint, so that it would not be adequately redressed by the remedy provided by law for the wrong. In such a case it is necessary to assume that burden, but it is no longer necessary to establish that the acts or omissions in question were unlawful, and a much wider remedy may be sought.
A good illustration of the distinction is provided by Re a company (No 005287 of 1985) [1986] BCLC 68. In that case the petitioners, who were minority shareholders, alleged that the respondent, who was the majority shareholder, had disposed of the company’s assets in breach of his fiduciary duty to the company and in a manner which was unfairly prejudicial to the interests of the petitioner. Hoffmann J refused to strike out the petition, holding that the fact that the petitioners could have brought a derivative action did not prevent them seeking relief under s 459.
Again, I respectfully agree. The very same facts may well found either a derivative action or a s 459 petition. But that should not disguise the fact that the nature of the complaint and the appropriate relief is different in the two cases. Had the petitioners’ true complaint been of the unlawfulness of the respondent’s conduct, so that it would be met by an order for restitution, then a derivative action would have been appropriate and a s 459 petition would not. But that was not the true nature of the petitioners’ complaint. They did not rely on the unlawfulness of the respondent’s conduct to found their cause of action; and they would not have been content with an order that the respondent make restitution to the company. They relied on the respondent’s unlawful conduct as evidence of the manner in which he had conducted the company’s affairs for his own benefit and in disregard of their interests as minority shareholders; and they wanted to be bought out. They wanted relief from mismanagement, not a remedy for misconduct.
When the petitioners launched the present proceedings, they wrongly believed that Mr Richmond was managing the affairs of the company in a manner which disregarded their interests and those of the creditors generally. That was a perfectly proper complaint to bring under s 27. Long before the case came to trial, however, it had become a simple action for professional negligence and nothing more. That, if established, would amount to misconduct; but it would neither constitute nor evidence unfairly prejudicial management. In my judgment it would be a misuse of language to describe an administrator who has managed the company’s affairs fairly and impartially and with a proper regard for the interests of all the creditors (and members where necessary), conscientiously endeavouring to do his best for them, but who has through oversight or inadvertence fallen below the standards of a reasonably competent insolvency practitioner in the carrying out of some particular transaction, as having managed the affairs of the company in a manner which is unfairly prejudicial to the creditors.’

Millett J
[1990] BCLC 760
Companies Act 1985 459
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedStandard Chartered Bank Ltd v Walker CA 1982
The mortgagee having obtained insufficient on the sale at auction of the property charged to recover the sum secured, applied for summary judgment against the mortgagor for that sum. The mortgagor resisted the application alleging that the mortgagee . .
CitedCuckmere Brick Co Ltd v Mutual Finance Ltd CA 1971
A mortgagee selling as mortagee in possession must ‘take reasonable care to obtain the true value of the property at the moment he chooses to sell it’ and obtain the best price for the property reasonably obtainable on the open market. However, . .

Cited by:
CitedSilven Properties Limited, Chart Enterprises Incorporated v Royal Bank of Scotland Plc, Vooght, Harris CA 21-Oct-2003
The claimants sought damages from mortgagees who had sold their charged properties as receivers. They said they had failed to sell at a proper value. They asked whether the express appointment in the mortgage of receivers as agents of the mortgagor . .
CitedSilven 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.

Negligence, Company, Insolvency

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.187031

In re Polly Peck International plc, Ex parte the joint administrators: ChD 1994

The purposes of a liquidation, or administration or receivership of a company must include the gathering of information as to the conduct of the affairs of the company, and those who had conducted them so that the office-holder can report to the Secretary of State as he is required to do by section 7(3) of the Disqualification Act: ‘it is quite clear that the purposes of the administration must include the gathering of information as to the conduct of the affairs of the company and those responsible for it by an administrator in order that he can report to the Secretary of State as he is required to do. He must do so in order that the Secretary of State can perform his duty, which is the important one of taking proceedings if it appears that a disqualification order should be made.’

Vinelott J
[1994] BCC 15
Company Directors’ Disqualification Act 1986 7(3), Insolvency Act 1986
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedOfficial Receiver v Wadge Rapps and Hunt (a firm) and another and two other actions HL 31-Jul-2003
(Orse In re Pantmaenog Timber Co Ltd)
The Receiver sought to use information obtained under section 236 (documents recovered from the directors’ solicitors) in disqualification proceedings.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The Act had . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Company

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.186355

Christopher Evans v SMG Television Limited etc: ChD 26 Jun 2003

The claimant had a series of agreements with the respondents. He had worked as radio presenter, having sold the radio station to the respondents. He was later dismissed and now sought damages for wrongful dismissal and breach of a partnership agreement. The defendants alleged he had breached the contracts inter alia by his failure to attend to business.
Held: The claimant was severely criticised in his character and behaviour. His breaches of the contract were such as to justify the defendants treating his behaviour as repudiatory, and to reject offers to comply with the contracts in future as empty. The judge criticised the refusal of the parties to mitigate the costs of such actions.

Mr Justice Lightman
[2003] EWHC 1423 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedGeneral Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corpn v Robertson HL 1909
The appellant agreed to pay andpound;1,000 to the executors of the owner of a diary if he was fatally injured in a railway accident within twelve months of his name being registered at its head office. The respondent’s husband filled up and . .
CitedThompson v Smith Repairers 1984
The court should not become involved in an assessment of damages so vague that it is shot through with imprecision. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Company, Employment

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.183818

Charterhouse Investment Trust Ltd v Tempest Diesels Ltd: ChD 1986

When looking at transactions challenged under the Act, the court must look to the ‘commercial realities’ of what had taken place. ‘There is no definition of giving financial assistance in the Section although some examples are given. The words have no technical meaning and their frame of reference is in my judgment the language of ordinary commerce. One must examine the commercial realities of the transaction and decide whether it can properly be described as the giving of financial assistance by the company bearing in mind that the section is a penal one and should not be strained to cover transactions which are not fairly within it ‘

Hoffmann J
[1986] BCLC 1
Companies Act 1985 54
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedMT Realisations Limited (In Liquidation) v Digital Equipment Co Limited CA 10-Apr-2003
The company was insolvent, depending upon loans to it from its parent company. In the liquidation, it was claimed that in a scheme for the acquisition of the shares, the assumption of liability to repay a loan amounted to unlawful financial . .
CitedAnglo Petroleum Ltd v TFB (Mortgages) Ltd ChD 24-Feb-2006
The company sought to say that loans of 15 million pounds were void under s151 of the 1985 Act. It was said that the loans infringed the provisions of s151 being unlawful financial assistance.
Held: The loans were valid: ‘if it is lawful for a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.181075

Goldtrail Travel Ltd v Aydin and Others: CA 21 Jan 2016

Application for stay of execution of judgment pending appeal

Patten LJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 20
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromGoldtrail Travel Ltd v Aydin and Others ChD 22-May-2014
Claim by company liquidators against former directors alleging misappropriation of company assets, and dishonest assistance. . .

Cited by:
At CAGoldtrail Travel Ltd v Onur Air Tasimacilik As SC 2-Aug-2017
At first instance the appellant had dishonestly assisted another party to defraud the respondent, and ordered payment of substantial damages. The defendant, non-resident, sought to appeal, and the respondent asked the court to order payment into . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Company

Updated: 19 January 2022; Ref: scu.566839

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 himself now also bankrupt. The pursuer now appealed.
Held: The appeal failed, and the claim against the director failed (Baroness Hale of Richmond DPSC and Lord Toulson JSC dissenting). Generally, one person has no right of civil action for another’s failure to comply with a statutory obligation where the statute imposed a criminal penalty for that failure to comply. However, as an exception liability may arise where the statutory obligation was imposed to benefit employees as a class, though it was necessary to show that the obligation created by the statute had been placed on the person sought to be made liable in the particular circumstances of the case, and would not apply where civil liability was already imposed on another. In this case liability already fell on the company, and not additionally on the directors.

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Mance, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath, Lord Toulson
[2016] UKSC 38, [2016] Lloyd’s Rep IR 591, [2016] ICR 862, [2016] 3 WLR 294, [2016] PIQR P15, 2016 SLT 887, [2016] WLR(D) 376, 2016 GWD 21-380, [2016] AC 1513, 2016 SCLR 434, [2016] 2 BCLC 287, UKSC 2015/0061
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary
Employers Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969
Scotland
Citing:
CitedRichardson v Pitt-Stanley CA 11-Aug-1994
The directors of a company did not become personally liable for damages, only because they had failed to insure the company for liability for personal injuries suffered as a result of the company’s activities, even though they may be criminally . .
At SCSCampbell v Peter Gordon Joiners Ltd and Forsyth, The Liquidator Thereof and Gordon SCS 3-Feb-2015
(Extra Division – Inner House) The pursuer was injured working as an apprentice for a company operated by its sole director, the second defender. Though he was an apprentice joiner, the company’s insurance excluded (in breach of the 1969 Act) injury . .
CitedGroves v Lord Wimborne CA 1898
The court heard a case dealing with a claim for breach of a duty to fence dangerous machinery under the Act.
Held: Legislation protecting safety in the workplace gives rise to an action by a person for whom the protection was intended for . .
CitedBlack v The Fife Coal Co, Ltd SCS 24-Nov-1908
. .
CitedMonk v Warbey CA 1935
The court took a strict view of a vehicle owner’s potential liability to injured third parties.
Held: A person who suffered injury by reason of a breach of s35 could maintain an action in damages for that breach: ‘The Road Traffic Act, 1930, . .
CitedLonrho Ltd v Shell Petroleum Co Ltd (No 2) HL 1-Apr-1981
No General Liability in Tort for Wrongful Acts
The plaintiff had previously constructed an oil supply pipeline from Beira to Mozambique. After Rhodesia declared unilateral independence, it became a criminal offence to supply to Rhodesia without a licence. The plaintiff ceased supply as required, . .
CitedCaparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others HL 8-Feb-1990
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement
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 . .
CitedFairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd and Others HL 20-Jun-2002
The claimants suffered mesothelioma after contact with asbestos while at work. Their employers pointed to several employments which might have given rise to the condition, saying it could not be clear which particular employment gave rise to the . .
CitedMorrison Sports Ltd and Others v Scottish Power SC 28-Jul-2010
A fire caused substantial damage to buildings. It arose from a ‘shim’ placed in a fuse box which then overheated. The parties disputed whose employee had inserted the shim. The Act under which the Regulations had been made was repealed and replaced . .
CitedButler (or Black) v Fife Coal Co, Ltd HL 19-Dec-1911
The court considered whether a civil remedy existed for breach of statutory duty. Lord Kinnear said: ‘If the duty be established, I do not think there is any serious question as to civil liability. There is no reasonable ground for maintaining that . .
CitedCutler v Wandsworth Stadium Ltd HL 1949
The Act required the occupier of a licensed racetrack to take all steps necessary to secure that, so long as a totalisator was being lawfully operated on the track, there was available for bookmakers space on the track where they could conveniently . .
CitedRainham Chemical Works Ltd (in liquidation) and others v Belvedere Fish Guano Co Ltd HL 1921
At a time of war, a process was invented where picric acid was manufactured from dinitrophenol (DNP) and nitrate of soda. DNP had been used mainly for the manufacture of dyes, and was a stable compound which did not explode easily. It was not in . .
CitedX (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council; M (A Minor) and Another v Newham London Borough Council; Etc HL 29-Jun-1995
Liability in Damages on Statute Breach to be Clear
Damages were to be awarded against a Local Authority for breach of statutory duty in a care case only if the statute was clear that damages were capable of being awarded. in the ordinary case a breach of statutory duty does not, by itself, give rise . .
CitedPerforming Right Society Ltd v Ciryl Theatrical Syndicate Ltd 1924
The court looked at personal responsibility of the directors of a company for torts committed by the company: ‘Prima facie a managing director is not liable for tortious acts done by servants of the company unless he himself is privy to the acts, . .
CitedRickless v United Artists Corporation CA 1987
The Act created a private right to performers. Although it might appear to provide criminal sanctions only, performers had the right to give or withhold consent to the use of their performances and to enforce that right by action in the civil . .
CitedRegina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office HL 24-Jul-1991
The prisoner challenged the decision to place him in segregation under Prison Rule 43. Under rule 43(1) the initial power to segregate was given to ‘the governor’. The case arose from the fact that the governor of one prison had purported to . .
CitedMorrison Sports Ltd and Others v Scottish Power SC 28-Jul-2010
A fire caused substantial damage to buildings. It arose from a ‘shim’ placed in a fuse box which then overheated. The parties disputed whose employee had inserted the shim. The Act under which the Regulations had been made was repealed and replaced . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company

Updated: 18 January 2022; Ref: scu.566483

Singh v Singh and Others: ChD 17 Jun 2016

The claimant seeks declarations:
i) That he is the beneficial owner of 50% of the shares in Glass Express Midlands Ltd (‘Glass’). Glass has two issued shares, one of which is registered in the name of the first defendant and the other in the name of the second defendant, his wife, and
ii) That he is the beneficial owner of 45% of the shares in GEM Blinds Ltd (‘GEM’). GEM has 100 issued shares, of which 90 are registered in the name of the first defendant and the remainder in the name of Runxi Chen. The claimant seeks his declaration in relation to the former only; he does not seek to disturb Runxi Chen’s holding.
There are also claims for consequential relief.
Cooke HHJ discussed the useof covert recordings: ‘I have the direct evidence of the recordings made by the claimant. It is true to say that these must be approached with some caution, as there is always a risk that where one party knows a conversation is being recorded but the other does not the content may be manipulated with a view to drawing the party who is unaware into some statement that can be taken out of context. But there can be great value in what is said in such circumstances, where the parties plainly know the truth of the matters they are discussing and are talking (at least on one side) freely about them.’

David Cooke HHJ
[2016] EWHC 1432 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Company, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 January 2022; Ref: scu.565854

The Sherlock Holmes International Society Ltd v Aidiniantz: ChD 23 May 2016

The company appealed against a winding up order

Mark Anderson QC
[2016] EWHC 1076 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Main JudgmentAidiniantz v The Sherlock Holmes International Society Ltd ChD 15-Jun-2016
Solicitor does not warrant his client’s case
The company had appealed from an order for its winding up. The solicitors had acted on the instructions of a director, whose authority was now challenged.
Held: The claim for costs against the solicitors failed. They had been properly retained . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company

Updated: 18 January 2022; Ref: scu.565850

Swedish Central Railway v Thompson: HL 1925

A corporation may have more than one residence. Lord Cave after citing De Beers said: ‘The central management and control of a company may be divided, and it may ‘keep house and do business’ in more than one place; and if so, it may have more than one residence.’

[1925] AC 495
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedTulip Trading Ltd v Bitcoin Association for BSV and Others ChD 5-Jan-2022
Security required for Bitcoin claim
Two applications for security for costs. The claimant claimed against fifteen overseas residents requiring a re-write of cryotocurrency systems so that he could recover sums he said were due to him in respect of Bitcoin assets which he said have . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company

Updated: 18 January 2022; Ref: scu.671261