header-logo header-logo

03 May 2024 / Lara Kuehl
Issue: 8069 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Company
printer mail-detail

Section 994 petitions: received wisdom?

169531
Why everyone was wrong about s 994 petitions. Lara Kuehl assesses THG v Zedra—the case that turned what we thought we knew on its head
  • Overturning 40 years of ‘received wisdom’ in company law, the Court of Appeal held in THG plc and others v Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd that unfair prejudice petitions are, in fact, subject to statutory limitation periods.
  • A 12-year limitation period will apply, unless the relief sought is the payment of money (liquidated or unliquidated), in which case, a six-year limitation period applies.
  • As the Court of Appeal recognised, some implications, such as when the courts can dismiss claims on the grounds of delay (even if brought within the relevant limitation period), will need to be worked out in future cases.

It had been widely believed for 40 years by the company law world that unfair prejudice petitions were not subject to any statutory limitation period. It now appears, however, that judges at every level, leading practitioner texts and two Law Commission reports have all been wrong about

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

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll