29/11/23
HUMPHREY v BENNETT [2023] EWCA Civ 1433
A judge had been wrong to give summary judgment on a derivative claim against directors for breaches of fiduciary duty. As the company had been run informally, the extent to which fellow directors were aware, or ought to have been aware, of the relevant facts and the extent to which the directors might be entitled to relief under s.1157 Companies Act 2006 were highly fact-sensitive and required fuller investigation at a trial.
24/5/18
ST VINCENT EUROPEAN GENERAL PARTNER LTD v ROBINSON [2018] EWHC 1230 (Comm)
Considers the right of a mortgagor to redeem a mortgage by tender [56]. Mortgaged property is not to be treated as having been redeemed in the event of wrongful refusal of a tender without a payment into court. The tender must also be unconditional [60]. It is at least arguable that an unconditional offer to pay by means of a bank transfer would constitute a valid tender [61]. Also considers the rule against recovery of company losses by a shareholder (reflective loss) [67] and the exception allowing recovery where the wrong done to the company has made it impossible for the company to pursue its cause of action against the wrongdoer: Giles v Rhind (2002). On the facts the claims could not succeed and were summarily dismissed.
4/9/17
WILTON UK LTD v SHUTTLEWORTH [2017] EWHC 2195 (Ch)
Failure to obtain permission to serve a derivative claim in accordance with Companies Act 2006 s 261 and CPR 19.9A invalidated steps taken in the proceedings, but the court had jurisdiction retrospectively to validate the claim. The court would hear further submissions as to how that jurisdiction should be exercised.