Kotonou v Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform [2010] EWHC 19 (Ch), [2010] All ER (D) 148 (Jun)
In cases concerning disqualification of a director, the question for decision by the trial judge was whether the proved conduct, viewed cumulatively and taking into account any extenuating circumstances, had fallen below the standards of probity and competence appropriate for persons fit to be directors of companies.
In considering an appeal, the judge was not entitled to tinker with the sentence which the registrar had fixed, but had to identify in relation to it some error of law, whether that be taking into account an irrelevant matter, leaving out of account an relevant matter, or reaching a conclusion that was so far outside the range of reasonable difference that it had to embody some error of legal reasoning. It was necessary to restate those fundamental matters because the application of the familiar principles to the facts of a particular case was essentially a matter for the trial judge.
