English courts’ willingness to uphold parties’ choice of law provides certainty in Brexit world, says expert – OUT-LAW.com

‘A Court of Appeal decision upholding the parties’ choice to use English law under a swap agreement will provide some relief to financial firms despite the ongoing uncertainty around the UK’s decision to leave the EU, an expert has said.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 21st June 2017

Source: www.out-law.com

Multiple Derivative Actions in Company Law – Can You Or Can’t You? – New Square Chambers

Posted May 21st, 2013 in company law, derivative claims, fraud, news, subsidiary companies by sally

“It has long been recognised in English law that as an exception to the rule in Foss v Harbottle a member of a company may bring an action on its behalf against wrongdoers who exert control over the company and who are preventing it from enforcing its rights, i.e. the single derivative action. A multiple derivative action potentially arises where the proposed claimant is not a member of the wronged company but is a member of the ultimate holding company. Since the coming into force of the Companies Act 2006, there has been considerable debate as to whether that legislation removed the common law double derivative action or even, in some quarters, whether such a common law action ever existed.”

Full story (Word)

New Square Chambers, 17th May 2013

Source: www.newsquarechambers.co.uk

Universal Project Management Services Ltd v Fort Gilkicker Ltd and others – WLR Daily

Universal Project Management Services Ltd v Fort Gilkicker Ltd and others [2013] EWHC 348 (Ch); [2013] WLR (D) 82

“English common law recognised multiple derivative actions before the coming into force of the Companies Act 2006 and they had survived the coming into force of that Act.”

WLR Daily, 26th February 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Certain Limited Partners in Henderson PFI Secondary Fund II LLP (a firm) v Henderson PFI Secondary Fund II LLP (a firm) and others – WLR Daily

Posted November 28th, 2012 in company law, contracts, derivative claims, law reports, partnerships by sally

Certain Limited Partners in Henderson PFI Secondary Fund II LLP (a firm) v Henderson PFI Secondary Fund II LLP (a firm) and others [2012] EWHC 3259 (Comm); [2012] WLR (D) 348

“A derivative claim brought by limited partners in a partnership, in the partnership’s name, against the partnership’s manager was permitted where there were special circumstances to justify such a claim.”

WLR Daily, 16th November 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Bamford v Harvey and another – WLR Daily

Posted October 30th, 2012 in derivative claims, law reports, shareholders by sally

Bamford v Harvey and another [2012] EWHC 2858 (Ch); [2012] WLR (D) 298

“‘Wrongdoer control’ of a company was not an absolute preclusive condition for the bringing of a derivative claim. However. where proceedings clearly could have been brought in the name of the company and no objection was raised on that ground, they should be so brought.”

WLR Daily, 18th October 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Roberts v Gill & Co – WLR Daily

Roberts v Gill & Co [2010] UKSC 22; [2010] WLR (D) 130

“A beneficiary under a will who had commenced proceedings against solicitors he alleged had acted negligently in connection with the estate could not, after the relevant limitation period had expired, amend his claim so as to also claim on behalf of the estate by way of a derivative action.”

WLR Daily, 21st May 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Roberts v Gill & Co (a Firm) and Another – Times Law Reports

Posted August 18th, 2008 in derivative claims, joinder, law reports by sally

Roberts v Gill & Co (a Firm) and Another

Court of Appeal

“When the court gave permission for a personal claim, brought by a beneficiary of an estate in his personal capacity, to be continued as a derivative claim on behalf of the estate, the personal representative or administrator had to be joined as a party to those proceedings.”

The Times, 18th August 2008

Source: www.timesonline.co.uk

Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.

Roberts v Gill & Co and another – WLR Daily

Posted July 17th, 2008 in derivative claims, joinder, law reports by sally

Roberts v Gill & Co and another [2008] EWCA Civ 803; [2008] WLR (D) 239

Where a beneficiary of an estate brought a derivative claim, the personal representative had to be joined as a party, since the situation was indistinguishable from that of a derivative action brought by a member of a company or corporate body, in which the company had to be joined as a defendant under CPR r 19.3.”

WLR Daily, 16th July 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Franbar Holdings Ltd v Patel and others – WLR Daily

Posted July 4th, 2008 in company directors, derivative claims, law reports, shareholders by sally

Franbar Holdings Ltd v Patel and others [2008] EWHC 1534 (Ch); [2008] WLR (D) 220

Where the question of ratification arose in the context of an application to continue a derivative claim, under s 261 of the Companies Act 2006, the court should ask itself whether the ratification had the effect that the claimant was being improperly prevented from bringing the claim on behalf of the company. That also applied where the connected person provisions in s 239 were not satisfied but there was still actual wrongdoer control by which there had been a diversion of assets to persons associated with the wrongdoer, albeit not connected in the sense provided by s 239(4).”

WLR Daily, 3rd July 2008

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.