header-logo header-logo

Limitation & unfair prejudice

14 June 2024 / Stephen Burns , Katie Bewick
Issue: 8075 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Limitation
printer mail-detail
177013
Post-Zedra, courts are more likely to strike out petitions that plead unfairly prejudicial conduct outside of relevant limitation periods. Stephen Burns & Katie Bewick explain why
  • Discusses the recent Court of Appeal judgment in THG PLC & Ors v Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Limited, which shakes up more than 40 years of ‘received wisdom’ that statutory limitation periods do not apply to unfair prejudice claims made pursuant to s 994 of the Companies Act 2006.

A claim in unfair prejudice may be made pursuant to s 994 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) to allege the affairs of a company are being or have been conducted in a manner that is unfairly prejudicial to the rights of a shareholder. While the court has wide discretionary powers in respect of remedies it grants, typically relief sought is for an order that the shares of the petitioner (or sometimes the respondent) are bought out at fair value. Other remedies can include that the affairs of the company are regulated such that the conduct complained of stops.

The Limitation Act

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

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

North west team expands with senior private client and property hires

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Firm boosts corporate team in Newcastle to support high-growth technology businesses

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll