header-logo header-logo

Non-members & s 994 petitions: a novel approach

31 May 2024 / Daniel Lightman KC
Issue: 8073 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Commercial , Company
printer mail-detail
175050
In a recent case, the court used its case management powers to order a split trial. Daniel Lightman KC elaborates
  • Only a member of a company can present an unfair prejudice petition under s 994 of the Companies Act 2006.
  • Where someone not currently a member who claims to be entitled to retrospective rectification of the company’s register of members presents a petition, the traditional approach has been to strike out the petition, or to stay it while the petitioner seeks to establish their entitlement to petition in separate proceedings.
  • However, in a recent case, the court made novel use of its case management powers to order a split trial and direct that the first trial should determine both whether the register of members should be rectified and whether the petition was well founded.

It is a long-established principle that only a registered shareholder can present an unfair prejudice petition under s 994 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) and an intended petitioner lacking

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll