|
Pender V Lushington
''Pender v Lushington'' (1877) 6 Ch D 70 is a leading case in UK company law, which confirms that a company member's right to vote may not be interfered with, because it is a right of property. Furthermore, any interference leads to a personal right of a member to sue in his own name to enforce his right. As Lord Jessel MR put it, a member: Facts The articles of association of the Direct United States Cable Company Ltd, registered under the Companies Act 1862 provided that no member would be allowed to vote on more than 100 shares at any meeting, and each block of ten shares was counted as one vote. It also provided that "the company shall not be affected with notice of any trust", a standard provision in company articles that is meant to allow companies to avoid complications or liability to the ultimate beneficiaries of shares. Mr John Pender had bought 1000 shares. He was also chairman of Globe Telegraph and Trust Company Ltd, a holding company of a large group with compet ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
UK Company Law
The United Kingdom company law regulates corporations formed under the Companies Act 2006. Also governed by the Insolvency Act 1986, the UK Corporate Governance Code, European Union Directives and court cases, the company is the primary legal vehicle to organise and run business. Tracing their modern history to the late Industrial Revolution, public companies now employ more people and generate more of wealth in the United Kingdom economy than any other form of organisation. The United Kingdom was the first country to draft modern corporation statutes, where through a simple registration procedure any investors could incorporate, limit liability to their commercial creditors in the event of business insolvency, and where management was delegated to a centralised board of directors. An influential model within Europe, the Commonwealth and as an international standard setter, UK law has always given people broad freedom to design the internal company rules, so long as the mandato ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Foss V Harbottle
''Foss v Harbottle'' (1843) 2 Hare 46167 ER 189is a leading English precedent in corporate law. In any action in which a wrong is alleged to have been done to a company, the proper claimant is the company itself. This is known as "the proper plaintiff rule", and the several important exceptions that have been developed are often described as "exceptions to the rule in ''Foss v Harbottle''". Amongst these is the "derivative action", which allows a minority shareholder to bring a claim on behalf of the company. This applies in situations of "wrongdoer control" and is, in reality, the only true exception to the rule. The rule in ''Foss v Harbottle'' is best seen as the starting point for minority shareholder remedies. The rule has now largely been partly codified and displaced in the United Kingdom by the Companies Act 2006 sections 260–263, setting out a statutory derivative claim. Facts Richard Foss and Edward Starkie Turton were two minority shareholders in the "Victoria Par ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
1877 In Case Law
Events January–March * January 1 – Queen Victoria is proclaimed ''Empress of India'' by the '' Royal Titles Act 1876'', introduced by Benjamin Disraeli, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom . * January 8 – Great Sioux War of 1876 – Battle of Wolf Mountain: Crazy Horse and his warriors fight their last battle with the United States Cavalry in Montana. * January 20 – The Conference of Constantinople ends, with Ottoman Turkey rejecting proposals of internal reform and Balkan provisions. * January 29 – The Satsuma Rebellion, a revolt of disaffected samurai in Japan, breaks out against the new imperial government; it lasts until September, when it is crushed by a professionally led army of draftees. * February 17 – Major General Charles George Gordon of the British Army is appointed Governor-General of the Sudan. * March – '' The Nineteenth Century'' magazine is founded in London. * March 2 – Compromise of 1877: The ... [...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] |
Isle Of Wight Railway Company V Tahourdin
''Isle of Wight Railway Company v Tahourdin'' (1884) LR 25 Ch D 320 is a UK company law case on removing directors under the old Companies Clauses Act 1845. In the modern Companies Act 2006, section 168 allows shareholders to remove of directors by a majority vote on reasonable notice, regardless of what the company constitution says. Before 1945, removal of directors depended on the constitution, however this case contains some useful guidance on how to properly construe the provisions of a constitution. Facts The shareholders of the Isle of Wight Railway Co instructed the board of directors to call a meeting so they could (1) appoint a meeting to investigate and potentially rearrange the company's management, and also (2) decide whether to remove the present directors and elect new ones. The directors called a meeting “for the purpose of considering and determining upon a demand of the requisitionists for the appointment of a committee to inquire into the working and general m ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Andrews V Gas Meter Company
''Andrews v Gas Meter Company'' (1884) LR 25 Ch D 320 is a UK company law case concerning the right of a company to amend its constitution to enable the issuing of preferential shares. Facts The company, incorporated under the 1856 and then the 1862 Acts, had £60,000 of share capital, divided into 600 £100 shares, each subdivisible by five. Capital could be increased according to art 27 by the general meeting. New shares would be the same as old shares, and there was no mention of priority or preference shares. The company wished to buy a meter manufacturing business that was in administration from one John West, and wished to change its articles to allow preferential shares to be allotted to him, as part of the consideration for the deal. There would be 100 £100 shares, carrying a preferential dividend of £5 each. Judgment Lindley LJ held that the company could issue the preferential shares. A company cannot deprive itself of the power to amend its articles by special resol ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Allen V Gold Reefs Of West Africa Ltd
''Allen v Gold Reefs of West Africa Ltd'' 9001 Ch 656 is a UK company law case concerning alteration of a company's articles of association. It held that alterations could not be interfered with by the court unless the change that had been made was not bona fide for the benefit of the company as a whole. This rule served as a marginal form of minority shareholder protection at common law, before the existence of any unfair prejudice remedy. Facts Gold Reefs’ articles gave it a "first and paramount lien" (the right to retain possession) on all partly paid shares held by any member for any debt owed to the company. Mr Zuccani held some partly paid up shares. He also owned the only fully paid up shares issued by the company. He died insolvent. The company altered its articles by special resolution to create a lien on all fully paid shares (deleting the words in brackets of ‘upon all shares (not fully paid) held by such members’). Mr Allen, one of the executors of Mr Zuccani (t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Ashby V White
''Ashby v White'' (170392 ER 126 is a foundational case in UK constitutional law and English tort law. It concerns the right to vote and misfeasance of a public officer. Lord Holt laid down the important principle that where there is injury in the absence of financial loss (injuria sine damno)' the law makes the presumption of damage and that it is sufficient to demonstrate that a right has been infringed. Facts Mr Ashby was prevented from voting at an election by the misfeasance of a constable, Mr White, on the apparent pretext that he was not a settled inhabitant. At the time, the case attracted considerable national interest, and debates in Parliament. It was later known as the Aylesbury election case. In the House of Lords, it attracted the interest of Peter King, 1st Baron King who spoke and maintained the right of electors to have a remedy at common law for denial of their votes, against Tory insistence on the privileges of the House of Commons. Sir Thomas Powys defen ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
UK Public Service Law
United Kingdom enterprise law concerns the ownership and regulation of organisations producing goods and services in the UK, European and international economy. Private enterprises are usually incorporated under the Companies Act 2006, regulated by company law, competition law, and insolvency law, while almost one third of the workforce and half of the UK economy is in enterprises subject to special regulation. Enterprise law mediates the rights and duties of investors, workers, consumers and the public to ensure efficient production, and deliver services that UK and international law sees as universal human rights. Labour, company, competition and insolvency law create general rights for stakeholders, and set a basic framework for enterprise governance, but rules of governance, competition and insolvency are altered in specific enterprises to uphold the public interest, as well as civil and social rights. Universities and schools have traditionally been publicly established, ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
MacDougall V Gardiner
Clan MacDougall is a Highland Scottish clan, historically based in and around Argyll. The Lord Lyon King of Arms, the Scottish official with responsibility for regulating heraldry in Scotland, issuing new grants of coats of arms, and serving as the judge of the Court of the Lord Lyon, recognizes under Scottish law the Chief of Clan MacDougall. The MacDougall chiefs share a common ancestry with the chiefs of Clan Donald in descent from Somerled of the 12th century (and thus further of the Viking-born Norse-Gael dynasty of House of Ivar). In the 13th century the Clan MacDougall whose chiefs were the original Lords of Argyll and later Lords of Lorne was the most powerful clan in the Western Highlands. During the Wars of Scottish Independence the MacDougalls sided with the Clan Comyn whose chiefs rivaled Robert the Bruce for the Scottish Crown and this resulted in clan battles between the MacDougalls and Bruce. This marked the MacDougall's fall from power and led to the rise of th ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
George Jessel (jurist)
Sir George Jessel, (13 February 1824 – 21 March 1883) was a British judge. He was one of the most influential commercial law and equity judges of his time, and served as the Master of the Rolls. He was the first Jew to be a regular member of the Privy Council and to hold high judicial office. Early life and education Born in Savile Row, London, Jessel was the son of Zadok Aaron Jessel, a Jewish merchant, and his wife Mary, ''née'' Harris. He was educated at Mr Neumegen's School for Jews at Kew, and being prevented by religious disabilities from proceeding to the University of Oxford or Cambridge, went to University College London, matriculating in 1840. He entered Lincoln's Inn as a student in 1842, and a year later took his BA at the University of London, becoming MA and gold medallist in mathematics and natural philosophy in 1844. In 1846 he was elected a fellow of University College, London. He entered Lincoln's Inn in 1842 as a student and was called to the bar in 1 ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Cestui Que Trust
In trust law, a beneficiary or '' cestui que'' use, a.k.a. ''cestui que'' trust, is the person or persons who are entitled to the benefit of any trust arrangement. A beneficiary will normally be a natural person, but it is perfectly possible to have a company as the beneficiary of a trust, and this often happens in sophisticated commercial transaction structures. With the exception of charitable trusts, and some specific anomalous non-charitable purpose trusts, all trusts are required to have ascertainable beneficiaries. Generally speaking, there are no strictures as to who may be a beneficiary of a trust; a beneficiary can be a minor, or under a mental disability (in fact many trusts are created specifically for persons with those legal disadvantages). It is also possible to have trusts for unborn children, although the trusts must vest within the applicable perpetuity period. Categorization There are various ways in which beneficiaries of trusts can be categorised, depending ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
