header-logo header-logo

09 October 2008
Issue: 7340 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Codified obstacles

Bill Davies casts a critical eye over the new statutory derivative provisions

Two cases have recently tested the new statutory derivative provisions in the Companies Act 2006. In both Mission Capital plc v Sinclair [2008] All ER (D) 225 and Franbar Holdings Ltd v Patel [2008] EWHC 1534 (Ch), permission to continue the derivative claim was refused.

Bringing a derivative claim was never easy and a large number of barriers were created by the courts in a bewildering array of cases. As a result, the Law Commission dubbed the claim “complicated and unwieldy” and a new statutory procedure was introduced in the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). However, although many of the archaic rules have been swept away, the new provisions may still prove to be a formidable obstacle to any shareholder seeking to bring a claim.

Before the main action can be brought, a member must first file sufficient evidence at court to establish a prima facie case. He must then apply to court for permission to continue the claim. This is designed to enable the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll