Tardy defendant allowed to fight £101m case ‘by skin of his teeth’ – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted July 14th, 2021 in costs, debts, default judgments, delay, news, shareholders by tracey

‘A civil defendant who waited three months to challenge a default judgment worth £101m has been given another chance to fight the claim.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 13th July 2021

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Retaining shares following litigation did not trigger DBA payment – Litigation Futures

Posted May 5th, 2021 in damages, fees, law firms, news, shareholders, solicitors by sally

‘A client who retained shares as part of a settlement but did not recover anything from the other party was not liable to pay his solicitors anything under a damages-based agreement (DBA), the High Court has ruled.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 4th May 2021

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

UK company law change could make section 172 fit for purpose – OUT-LAW.com

‘A relatively small change to section 172 of the UK’s Companies Act 2006 could have a transformative impact on company law, directors’ duties, corporate governance, businesses and, ultimately, the economy, society, and the environment.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 20th April 2021

Source: www.pinsentmasons.com

FCA warning over ‘risky’ TikTok trading tips – BBC News

Posted February 8th, 2021 in financial services ombudsman, internet, news, shareholders by tracey

‘TikTok creators have been offering “risky” trading tips in the wake of the GameStop shares frenzy, a UK regulator has warned. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) said people should be wary of users “promising high-return investments”.’

Full Story

BBC News, 7th February 2021

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Court of Appeal Considers ‘Lost Years’ Claims in Head v The Culver Heating Co Ltd – Ropewalk Chambers

‘In a judgment handed down on 18 January 2021 in Head v The Culver Heating Co Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 34, the Court of Appeal unanimously allowed an appeal against the decision of HHJ Melissa Clarke dismissing the Claimant’s “lost years” claim. The judge had dismissed the claim on the basis that the Claimant’s income derived from his successful family business, the profitability of which would continue after his death such that there was no loss. In the Court of Appeal, however, Bean LJ (with whom Males and Andrews LJJ agreed) held that the Claimant’s income was the product of his hard work and flair as opposed to a return on passive investment, such that it should be treated as earnings rather than investment income and was thus recoverable in the “lost years” claim.’

Full Story

Ropewalk Chambers, 19th January 2021

Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk

Case Comment: Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd [2020] UKSC 31 – UKSC Blog

Posted September 4th, 2020 in appeals, company law, damages, debts, insolvency, news, shareholders, Supreme Court, third parties by sally

‘In this case comment, David Bridge and Jessica Foley, both solicitor-advocates within the CMS litigation & arbitration team, comment on the decision handed down by the UK Supreme Court earlier this summer in the matter of Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd [2020] UKSC 31, which concerned whether the rule against reflective loss bars creditors of a company from claiming directly against a third party for asset-stripping the company.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 4th September 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

Macquarie Global Infrastructure Funds 2 Sarl v Rodino – Blackstone Chambers

Posted August 13th, 2020 in agreements, jurisdiction, news, shareholders by sally

‘The Commercial Court (Jacobs J) has dismissed applications to dispute the English Court’s jurisdiction in respect of claims for damages and declarations of non-liability in respect of proceedings brought by the Defendants in Luxembourg claiming damages in excess of €68 million. The decision illustrates the English Court’s commercially-minded approach to the construction of exclusive jurisdiction clauses and to the provisions of the Brussels I Recast Regulation that confer priority on courts seised under those clauses.

Full Story

Blackstone Chambers, 6th August 2020

Source: www.blackstonechambers.com

Reining in the rule against reflective loss: Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted July 30th, 2020 in causation, company law, damages, insolvency, news, shareholders, Supreme Court by sally

‘In a much-anticipated judgment, the Supreme Court in Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd unanimously allowed an appeal against a decision which, if it had been allowed to stand, would have denuded the intentional economic torts of much of their practical utility.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 28th July 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Reflecting on “reflective loss”: Case note on Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd [2020] UKSC 31 – Hailsham Chambers

Posted July 30th, 2020 in causation, company law, damages, insolvency, news, shareholders, Supreme Court by sally

‘The appeal to the Supreme Court in Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd [2020] UKSC 31 re-states the principle that a company’s shareholders cannot recover damages against a wrongdoer for loss which is “reflective” of a loss caused by the wrongdoer to the company itself.’

Full Story

Hailsham Chambers, July 2020

Source: www.hailshamchambers.com

Sevilleja v Marex: Reflective Loss Restated – 4 New Square

Posted July 30th, 2020 in causation, company law, damages, insolvency, news, shareholders, Supreme Court by sally

‘The Supreme Court’s decision in Sevilleja v. Marex Financial Ltd, 15 July 2020, fundamentally restates the doctrine of reflective loss in company law so that:

A claim by a company’s creditor against a third party will not be barred where it reflects loss suffered by the company, even if the creditor is also a shareholder; and
There is no longer an exception to the doctrine where the wrongdoer has brought about the company’s impecuniosity.’

Full Story

4 New Square, 17th July 2020

Source: www.4newsquare.com

De Sena v Notaro [2020] EWHC 1031 (Ch): The family, the demerger and the expert who wasn’t an expert – Hailsham Chambers

‘The case arose out of a corporate demerger which took place in relation to a family owned company, S Notaro Holdings (“Holdings”), on 28 April 2011. The First Claimant (C1), and the First Defendant (D1) were siblings. Prior to the demerger, they were both shareholders in and directors of Holdings. Neither were majority shareholders. D1 held 43.75% of the shares in Holdings, and C1 held 31.25%. In the demerger, C1 gave up her shares in Holdings in exchange for some assets of Holdings or its subsidiaries being transferred to the Second Claimant (C2), a company formed for that purpose, owned and controlled by C1.’

Full Story

Hailsham Chambers, June 2020

Source: www.hailshamchambers.com

No tax relief on pension contributions paid in shares – Wilberforce Chambers

Posted May 29th, 2020 in income tax, news, pensions, shareholders by sally

‘In a decision which threatens to bring turmoil to vast number of SIPPs (self-invested personal pensions), the Upper Tribunal has decided in HMRC v Sippchoice Ltd [2020] UKUT 149 (TCC) (Roth J and Upper Tribunal Judge Greg Sinfield) that member contributions to registered pension schemes are only eligible for tax relief where they are paid in money. Where a member transfers shares to the scheme trustees no tax relief is available, even where done in satisfaction of a money debt, and notwithstanding the terms of HRMC’s own Pensions Tax Manual which appears to say the opposite.’

Full Story

Wilberforce Chambers, 18th May 2020

Source: www.wilberforce.co.uk

The expansion of a director duty to act in the interests of the company – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted February 26th, 2020 in chambers articles, company directors, news, shareholders by sally

‘A director’s duty to act in good faith in the interests of the company is the cornerstone of a director’s position. This long standing obligation was revamped in the Companies Act 2006 with the introduction of a new requirement that directors should have regard to a package of concerns reflecting what has been described as “enlightened shareholder value”. Following the enactment of section 172 of the Companies Act 2006, when determining what is in the interests of the company, directors are required to look beyond the pursuit of profit and consider various factors and third parties stakeholders who could be affected by the decision.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 24th February 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Banking litigators eye disputes from LIBOR change – Litigation Futures

Posted January 8th, 2020 in banking, class actions, contracts, interest, news, shareholders by sally

‘The replacement of LIBOR and the growth in class actions are set to come to the fore for banking litigators, according to specialist solicitors.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 7th January 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

VAT recoverable on shareholder employee tax avoidance scheme says tribunal – OUT-LAW.com

Posted December 11th, 2019 in company directors, employment, news, shareholders, tax avoidance, taxation, tribunals, VAT by tracey

‘Advice on incentivising employees in a tax efficient manner has a direct and immediate link to the purposes of the business and so VAT input tax should be recoverable, even if the employees are directors and shareholders, the UK’s First-tier Tribunal (FTT) has ruled.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 10th December 2019

Source: www.pinsentmasons.com

The CumEx trading scandal: What are the implications for the UK? – 5SAH

Posted November 26th, 2019 in financial regulation, news, shareholders, tax avoidance, taxation by sally

‘“CumEx” is a controversial dividend arbitrage stock trading practice currently under investigation in several European jurisdictions with, to date, limited involvement from the UK authorities. It allegedly caused significant losses to various EU treasuries, which are currently engaged in civil proceedings, regulatory settlements and criminal proceedings, including against two former London traders who are currently on trial for tax fraud in Germany.’

Full Story

5SAH, 19th November 2019

Source: www.5sah.co.uk

Lloyds shareholders lose legal fight over HBOS takeover – The Guardian

Posted November 18th, 2019 in banking, class actions, damages, disclosure, news, shareholders, takeovers by sally

‘Thousands of shareholders in Lloyds Banking Group have lost a multimillion pound legal battle against the bank over its takeover of HBOS at the height of the global financial crisis.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 15th November 2019

Source: www.theguardian.com

Derivative actions and unfair prejudice petitions, by Georgina Squire – Law Society Gazette

‘Shareholder claims principally consist of unfair prejudice petitions (UPPs), instigated by members on their own behalf, and derivative actions (DAs), brought by the members on behalf of the company. Dinglis v Dinglis [2019] and Tonstate Group Ltd and Ors v Edward Wojakovski [2019] have developed the law surrounding a shareholder’s ability to bring UPPs and DAs. They involve family-run companies, providing cautionary tales for family members who choose not to formalise matters sufficiently.’

Full Story

Law Society Gazette, 23rd September 2019

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Expert Evidence on Share Valuations: When to use hot tubbing in unfair prejudice petitions – 4 New Square

‘A critical part of any unfair prejudice petition is the valuation of the minority shareholding. Paul Mitchell QC and Nigel Burroughs of 4 New Square were counsel on different sides in Swain v Swains Plc, a case in which the expert share valuation evidence was taken concurrently. They look at the pros and cons of hot tubbing, and offer practical advice on how to approach the way experts should give their evidence.’

Full Story

4 New Square, 22nd July 2019

Source: www.4newsquare.com

Shareholder Disputes in Sport – 4 New Square

‘As the law of unfair prejudice in the conduct of companies’ affairs has developed, sports clubs (particularly football and rugby clubs) have proved to be fertile sources of disputes between shareholders. In this article, we examine unfair prejudice petitions which have concerned the sports sector to look at the effects of those decisions and at what we can learn not just about the sorts of shareholder disputes which arise in sports clubs but also what we can learn from those decisions and apply to shareholder disputes in other contexts.’

Full Story

4 New Square, 24th July 2019

Source: www.4newsquare.com