header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
11 December 2015 / Andrew Stafford KC , Carlos Pires
Issue: 7680 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Partners in crime

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Andrew Stafford QC & Carlos Pires analyse dysfunctional partnerships

Life in a partnership is rarely plain sailing. Over time, tensions can emerge as strategies, personalities and remuneration reveal divergent aspirations and perspectives. For the aggrieved LLP member, life may have become more complicated following the High Court decision in Flanagan v Liontrust Investment Partners LLP and others [2015] EWHC 2171 (Ch), [2015] All ER (D) 295.

The significance of the decision lies not in the factual scenario which generated the dispute, but in the judge’s clarification as to the role of the doctrine of repudiatory breach. Mr Justice Henderson ruled that the doctrine did not apply, leaving aggrieved or outgoing LLP members with less leverage and more restrictions than before.

The facts

The claimant—Mr Flanagan—was a member of Liontrust Investment Partners LLP, that ran a hedge fund. His participation was governed by the terms of an LLP agreement and a side letter. In August 2012 Liontrust purported to give him notice of compulsory retirement under the agreement and to place him on garden leave before

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
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll