''Hogg v Cramphorn Ltd'' 967Ch 254 is a famous

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 ...

case on director liability. The Court held that corporate directors who dilute the value of the

stock In finance, stock (also capital stock) consists of all the shares by which ownership of a corporation or company is divided.Longman Business English Dictionary: "stock - ''especially AmE'' one of the shares into which ownership of a company ...

in order to prevent a

hostile takeover In business, a takeover is the purchase of one company (the ''target'') by another (the ''acquirer'' or ''bidder''). In the UK, the term refers to the acquisition of a public company whose shares are listed on a stock exchange, in contrast to ...

(the poison pill) are breaching their

fiduciary A fiduciary is a person who holds a legal or ethical relationship of trust with one or more other parties (person or group of persons). Typically, a fiduciary prudently takes care of money or other assets for another person. One party, for exampl ...

duty to the

company A company, abbreviated as co., is a Legal personality, legal entity representing an association of people, whether Natural person, natural, Legal person, legal or a mixture of both, with a specific objective. Company members share a common p ...

Facts

Mr Baxter approached the board of directors of Cramphorn Ltd. to make a takeover offer for the company. The directors (including Colonel Cramphorn who was managing director and chairman) believed that the takeover would be bad for the company. So they issued 5707 shares with ten votes each to the trustees of the employee’s welfare scheme (Cramphorn, an employee and the auditor). This meant they could outvote Baxter's bid for majority control. A shareholder, Mr Hogg, sued, alleging the issue of the shares was ''ultra vires''. Cramphorn argued that the directors' actions were all in good faith. It was feared that Mr Baxter would sack many of the workers.

Judgment

Buckley J, writing for the Court, held that the new shares issued by the directors are invalid. The directors violated their duties as directors by issuing shares for the purpose of preventing the takeover. The power to issue shares creates a fiduciary duty and must only be exercised in order to raise capital and not for any other purposes such as to prevent a takeover. The act could not be justified on the basis that the directors honestly believed that it would be in the best interest of the company. The improper issuance of shares can only be made valid if the decision is

ratified Ratification is a principal's approval of an act of its agent that lacked the authority to bind the principal legally. Ratification defines the international act in which a state indicates its consent to be bound to a treaty if the parties inte ...

by the shareholders at a

general meeting A general assembly or general meeting is a meeting of all the members of an organization or shareholders of a company. Specific examples of general assembly include: Churches * General Assembly (presbyterian church), the highest court of presby ...

, with no votes allowed to the newly issued shares.

Notes

{{reflist, 2

References

*Brudney, 'Fiduciary Ideology in Transactions Affecting Corporate Control' (1966) 65 Michigan Law Review 259 United Kingdom company case law High Court of Justice cases 1967 in case law 1967 in British law

Facts

Judgment

See also

Notes

References