header-logo header-logo

08 January 2020
Issue: 7869 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Weekly law digests

Company

Tonstate Group Ltd and others v Wojakovski and others [2019] EWHC 3363 (Ch), [2019] All ER (D) 34 (Dec)

Part of the first defendant’s defence that had relied on the Duomatic principle, that the informal approval of all the members of a company was sufficient to ratify a breach of fiduciary duty, would be struck out. The Chancery Division so held in a claim that alleged that the first claimant had extracted funds from a group of companies improperly, and held that the Duomatic principle could not apply to conduct which the company could not lawfully have carried out itself, nor could it apply to ratify payments which it was accepted the company could not lawfully have made.

Contract

Mulville v Sandelson [2019] EWHC 3287 (Ch), [2019] All ER (D) 32 (Dec)

The judge had been correct to find that a settlement agreement between the appellant and the respondent had created an independent obligation on the appellant to pay a sum. The Chancery Division accordingly found that the judge had been correct

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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