The appellant challenged a refusal to order payment of costs by a shareholder of the defendant company but not a director who, it claimed, had caused the company to continue a court action which was primarily for his personal benefit, and not for that of the company, and funded the company for this purpose.
Held: It was not an erosion of principle to allow such an order. If the shareholder usurped the function of director, he did so at his own risk, and that risk was the possibility of an order for costs of the successful party. The appeal was allowed.
Judges:
Kennedy LJ, Chadwick LJ, Jonathan Parker LJ
Citations:
Times 08-Jun-2005
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Costs
Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.226035