header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Company—Derivative action—Permission to continue with derivative claim

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
08 March 2013
Issue: 7551 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Re Fort Gilkicker Ltd; Universal Project Management Services Ltd v Fort Gilkicker Ltd and others [2013] EWHC 348 (Ch), [2013] All ER (D) 313 (Feb)

Chancery Division, Companies Court, Mr Justice Briggs, 26 February 2013

CA 2006 did not abolish the “multiple derivative action”; and a derivative action may be brought by members of an LLP on behalf of a company wholly owned by that LLP.

James Bailey (instructed by Olephant Solicitors) for UPMS. Marion Smith (instructed by DWF LLP) for P and FGPL.

Prior to the coming into force of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006), derivative actions, by which a member of a company was exceptionally permitted to litigate a cause of action vested in the company where the company was unable to do so, were governed by common law. The ordinary derivative action (by a member of the allegedly wronged company) was wholly replaced by the statutory derivative claim provided in CA 2006, which conferred locus standi only upon a member of 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

Read All
Sponsored by
Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Law Society calls for clarity on AML
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Turning corporate liability into opportunity
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
NLJ this week: A prince no more?
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
NLJ this week: Shareholder secrecy sunk
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
NLJ this week: The expanding remit of national security law
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll