header-logo header-logo

Directors

16 December 2010
Issue: 7446 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills v Doffman and another Re Stakefield (Midlands) Ltd and other companies [2010] EWHC 3175 (Ch), [2010] All ER (D) 89 (Dec)

It was established that the test under s 6 of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 was whether the person’s conduct as a director of the company or companies in question made him unfit to be concerned in the management of a company. Those were ordinary words which would ordinarily be simple to apply.

When considering whether a person’s conduct made him unfit to be concerned in the management of a company, the court was required by s 9 of the 1986 Act to have regard to the matters listed in Sch 1 to the 1986 Act. That list, however, was not an exhaustive list of the matters which might be taken into account in determining unfitness. The burden of proof in alleging unfitness rested on the Secretary of State, and was the ordinary civil standard.
 

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
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'
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
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll