header-logo header-logo

05 May 2017
Issue: 7744 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Company

Pinfold v Ansell and others [2017] EWHC 889 (Ch), [2017] All ER (D) 140 (Apr)

The Chancery Division ruled on an unfair prejudice petition presented by the petitioner shareholder of a company, under s 994 of the Companies Act 2006, in respect of a company that had been operated as a quasi-partnership. The court held that the it had been unfair for the petitioner’s remaining means of involvement and influence, if not control, over the conduct of the business to have been terminated by his removal as a director of the company and the refusal of provision of any financial or management information. Accordingly, it held that the association should be dissolved and that the respondents should purchase P’s shares for £309,000.

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll