header-logo header-logo

The flexible friend

20 January 2017 / Daniel Lightman KC
Issue: 7730 / Categories: Features , Company , Commercial
printer mail-detail
nlj_7730_lightman

Daniel Lightman QC highlights how versatile ss 994 & 996 of the Companies Act 2006 can be for minority shareholders presenting an unfair prejudice petition

  • The courts take a flexible approach to the requirements for an unfair prejudice petition to be well-founded under s 994 of the Companies Act 2006.
  • The courts show similar flexibility in exercising the wide powers given to them as to what relief they can grant under s 996, and against whom.
  • While a share purchase order is the most common relief granted, the courts are increasingly open to bespoke solutions tailored to the circumstances of the particular case.
  • These factors make a s 994 petition—or the threat of presenting one—an increasingly powerful and flexible weapon for a minority shareholder.

Recent case law has emphasised just how versatile a weapon the power to present an unfair prejudice petition under s 994 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) can be for a minority shareholder.

The requirements of s 994

By s 994(1) of CA 2006, the petitioning

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll