|
Bhullar V Bhullar
is a leading UK company law case on the principle that directors must avoid any possibility of a conflict of interest, particular relating to corporate opportunities. It was not decided under, but is relevant to, section 175 of the Companies Act 2006. Facts Bhullar Bros Ltd was owned by families of two brothers. Each side owned 50% of ordinary shares. The directors were Mr Mohan Bhullar, his son Tim, Mr Sohan Bhullar and his sons Inderjit and Jatinderjit. The company had a grocery store at 44 Springwood Street, Huddersfield. It also owned an investment property called Springbank Works, Leeds Road, which was leased to a bowling alley business called UK Superbowl Ltd. In 1998 the families began to fall out. Mohan and Tim told the board they wished for the company to buy no further investment properties. Negotiations began to split up the company, but they were unsuccessful. In 1999, Inderjit went bowling at the UK Superbowl Ltd alley. He noticed that the carpark next door (cal ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Court Of Appeal Of England And Wales
The Court of Appeal (formally "His Majesty's Court of Appeal in England", commonly cited as "CA", "EWCA" or "CoA") is the highest court within the Courts of England and Wales#Senior Courts of England and Wales, Senior Courts of England and Wales, and second in the legal system of England and Wales only to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The Court of Appeal was created in 1875, and today comprises 39 Lord Justices of Appeal and Lady Justices of Appeal. The court has two divisions, Criminal and Civil, led by the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, Lord Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls, Master of the Rolls and Records of the Chancery of England respectively. Criminal appeals are heard in the Criminal Division, and civil appeals in the Civil Division. The Criminal Division hears appeals from the Crown Court, while the Civil Division hears appeals from the County Court (England and Wales), County Court, High Court of Justice and Family Court (England and Wales ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Keech V Sandford
is a foundational case, deriving from English trusts law, on the fiduciary duty of loyalty. It concerns the law of trusts and has affected much of the thinking on directors' duties in company law. It holds that a trustee owes a strict duty of loyalty so that there can never be a possibility of ''any'' conflict of interest. The case's importance derives partly from its historical context, with the South Sea Bubble. Lord King LC, who decided the case, replaced the former Lord Chancellor, Thomas Parker, 1st Earl of Macclesfield who was tried and found guilty in 1725 for accepting bribes and speculating with and losing client money in the South Sea crash. Lord Macclesfield had, probably not coincidentally previously held that a fiduciary was entitled to take money from a trust, invest it on their own behalf, and keep the profit, if they restored money to the trust. ''Keech'' reversed this, and the law in England and the UK has maintained a strict opposition to any possibility of a ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Court Of Appeal (England And Wales) Cases
A court of appeals, also called a court of appeal, appellate court, appeal court, court of second instance or second instance court, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In much of the world, court systems are divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts, often on a discretionary basis. A particular court system's supreme court is its highest appellate court. Appellate courts nationwide can operate under varying rules. Under its standard of review, an appellate court decides the extent of the deference it would give to the lower court's decision, based on whether the appeal were one of fact or of law. In reviewing an issue of fact, an appellate court ordinar ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
United Kingdom Company Case Law
United may refer to: Places * United, Pennsylvania, an unincorporated community * United, West Virginia, an unincorporated community Arts and entertainment Films * ''United'' (2003 film), a Norwegian film * ''United'' (2011 film), a BBC Two film Literature * ''United!'' (novel), a 1973 children's novel by Michael Hardcastle Music * United (band), Japanese thrash metal band formed in 1981 Albums * ''United'' (Commodores album), 1986 * ''United'' (Dream Evil album), 2006 * ''United'' (Marvin Gaye and Tammi Terrell album), 1967 * ''United'' (Marian Gold album), 1996 * ''United'' (Phoenix album), 2000 * ''United'' (Woody Shaw album), 1981 Songs * "United" (Judas Priest song), 1980 * "United" (Prince Ital Joe and Marky Mark song), 1994 * "United" (Robbie Williams song), 2000 * "United", a song by Danish duo Nik & Jay featuring Lisa Rowe Television * ''United'' (TV series), a 1990 BBC Two documentary series * ''United!'', a soap opera that aired on BBC One from 1965-19 ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Canadian Aero Service Ltd
Canadians (french: Canadiens) are people identified with the country of Canada. This connection may be residential, legal, historical or cultural. For most Canadians, many (or all) of these connections exist and are collectively the source of their being ''Canadian''. Canada is a multilingual and multicultural society home to people of groups of many different ethnic, religious, and national origins, with the majority of the population made up of Old World immigrants and their descendants. Following the initial period of French and then the much larger British colonization, different waves (or peaks) of immigration and settlement of non-indigenous peoples took place over the course of nearly two centuries and continue today. Elements of Indigenous, French, British, and more recent immigrant customs, languages, and religions have combined to form the culture of Canada, and thus a Canadian identity. Canada has also been strongly influenced by its linguistic, geographic, and eco ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Industrial Development Consultants V Cooley
''Industrial Development Consultants Ltd v Cooley'' 9721 WLR 443 is a UK company law case on the corporate opportunities doctrine, and the duty of loyalty from the law of trusts. It is also applicable for fiduciary duty of an agent under agency law which states that an agent has a fiduciary relationship with his principal. This is a position which is similar to that of a trustee. Facts Mr Cooley was an architect employed as managing director of Industrial Development Consultants Ltd., part of IDC Group Ltd. The Eastern Gas Board had a lucrative project pending, to design a depot in Letchworth Letchworth Garden City, commonly known as Letchworth, is a town in the North Hertfordshire district of Hertfordshire, England. It is noted for being the first garden city. The population at the time of the 2011 census was 33,249. Letchworth .... Mr. Cooley was told that the gas board did not want to contract with a firm, but directly with him. Mr. Cooley then told the board of IDC ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Boardman V Phipps
''Boardman v Phipps'' 966UKHL 2is a landmark English trusts law case concerning the duty of loyalty and the duty to avoid conflicts of interest. Facts Tom Boardman, Baron Boardman, Mr Tom Boardman was the solicitor of a family trust.See the case report at 9672 AC 46 The trust assets include a 27% holding in a company (a textile company with factories in Coventry, Nuneaton and in Australia through a subsidiary). Boardman was concerned about the accounts of the company, and thought that to protect the trust a majority shareholding is required. He and a beneficiary, Tom Phipps, went to a shareholders' general meeting of the company. They realised together that they could turn the company around. They suggested to a trustee (Mr Fox) that it would be desirable to acquire a majority shareholding, but Fox said it was completely out of the question for the trustees to do so. With the knowledge of the trustees, Boardman and Phipps decided to purchase the shares themselves. They bought a ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Regal (Hastings) Ltd V Gulliver
, is a leading case in UK company law regarding the rule against directors and officers from taking personal advantage of a corporate opportunity in violation of their duty of loyalty to the company. The Court held that a director is in breach of his duties if he takes advantage of an opportunity that the corporation would otherwise be interested in but was unable to take advantage. However the breach could have been resolved by ratification by the shareholders, which those involved neglected to do. Facts Regal owned a cinema in Hastings. They took out leases on two more, through a new subsidiary, to make the whole lot an attractive sale package. However, the landlord first wanted them to give personal guarantees. They did not want to do that. Instead the landlord said they could up share capital to £5,000. Regal itself put in £2,000, but could not afford more (though it could have got a loan). Four directors each put in £500, the Chairman, Mr Gulliver, got outside subscribers ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Bray V Ford
''Bray v Ford'' 896AC 44 is an English defamation law case, which also concerns some principles of conflict of interest relevant for trusts and company law. Facts Mr Bray was a governor of Yorkshire College. Mr Ford was the vice-chairman of the governors and had also been working as a solicitor for the college. Bray sent him a letter, and circulated it to others, saying, “Sir, during last summer, as you are aware, it came to my knowledge that whilst holding the fiduciary position of vice-chairman of the Yorkshire College you were illegally and improperly, as you know, making profit as its paid solicitor.” This was held to be libellous by the jury at trial. But Cave J had directed the jury that the College’s articles did in fact allow for pay of services as a solicitor. The jury awarded £600 damages, and the question was whether the award could stand in the face of the misdirection. The Court of Appeal (Lord Esher MR, Lopes LJ and Rigby LJ) held this was a misdirection ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Parker V McKenna
''Parker v McKenna'' (1874–75) LR 10 Ch App 96 is a UK company law case, concerning the rule against having any conflict of interest. Facts Mr McKenna was one of four directors of the National Bank of Ireland, a joint stock bank. In 1864 resolutions were passed to increase the capital by issuing 20,000 £50 shares. They were to be offered to old shareholders first according to how many they already held, for a £25 premium and £5 as a first call. Any not bought would be sold by directors at a £30 premium. The directors allotted 9778 shares to a Mr Stock, who paid only £5 a share. It was arranged that the certificates would be withheld, the bank had a lien on the shares for the premiums and no transfer could be made till £30 was paid up. He then said he could not take so many and asked the directors to relieve him. They took many at £30 a share, and then sold them on at a profit. The £30 per share was always paid to the bank. Judgment Lord Cairns LC, Sir WM James LJ and S ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Aberdeen Railway Co V Blaikie Brothers
''Aberdeen Railway Co v Blaikie Brothers'' (1854is a UK company law case. It concerns the fiduciary duty of loyalty, and in particular, the duty not to engage in self-dealing. It laid down a basic rule that if a director had an interest in a corporate transaction, the transaction is voidable at the company's will, and it is the duty of directors to avoid any possibility of a conflict of interest. This case preceded the Companies Act 2006 section 177, that requires that if directors are interested in a proposed transaction, they should merely declare that interest to the board, and section 239 which stipulates that in approving any transaction the interested director may not vote. Facts Blaikie Bros had a contract with Aberdeen Railway to make iron chairs at £8.50 a ton. They sued to enforce the contract. Aberdeen Railway argued they were not bound because at the time, the Chairman of their board of directors, Sir Thomas Blaikie, was the Managing Director of Blaikie Bros. There ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Whelpdale V Cookson
''Whelpdale v Cookson'' (1747) 27 ER 856 is an English trusts law case, also relevant for UK company law, on the duty of loyalty owed by a trustee to beneficiaries of the trust. Facts A trustee purchased land that was owned by the trust. Judgment Lord Hardwicke gave the judgment of the court. The text in the English Report reads as follows.(1747) 27 ER 856, ie Vol. 27, p.856 See also *''Keech v Sandford is a foundational case, deriving from English trusts law, on the fiduciary duty of loyalty. It concerns the law of trusts and has affected much of the thinking on directors' duties in company law. It holds that a trustee owes a strict duty of ...'' Notes {{reflist, 2 English trusts case law United Kingdom company case law 1747 in British law Court of Chancery cases ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.jpg "Click for more on -> Court Of Appeal (England And Wales) Cases")
