The applicant was a member of the respondent company. The respondent had prepared a report into the behaviour of a chairman of its own enquiry into televising racing, but where it had been alleged that the chairman, himself a TV owner had made an improper approach to a TV company. The applicant sought a copy of the report and supporting material.
Held: It was not possible to construe the articles of the company to impose such an obligation. Extrinsic circumstances could not be relied upon to create an interpretation of the articles inconsistent with their plain words. No duty of care arose in the applicant’s favour, and no public law interests arose.
Judges:
Mr Justice Patten
Citations:
Gazette 21-Nov-2002
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Company
Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.178243
