Wills & Trusts Law Reports | Winter 2020 #181This was an appeal against summary judgment on a claim for equitable compensation for £13,149,479 plus interest at 2.5% pa compounded annually.
A was a director of R. A and his sister (Ms Patel) had founded R and had been sole directors and (directly and indirectly) owned all of the shares. Between 2009 and 2014, A had caused R to pay £13,763,452 against sham invoices to Dubai companies. The Dubai companies had retained 5-10% of the invoiced sums and paid the balance to A (and Ms Patel’s) personal bank accounts, to them in cash, and to third parties for the purchase of a New York ...
Pennyfeathers underscores the stringency of directors’ duties and indicates when the court will lift the corporate veil to provide a remedy for breach. Nicholas Broomfield explains ‘Lord Sumption had affirmed a limited power of the court to pierce the corporate veil in circumstances where a party was abusing corporate personality to evade their obligations.’ The …
Continue reading "Fiduciary Duties: Rigour at all times"
This post is only available to members.
Wills & Trusts Law Reports | January/February 2014 #136In April 2003 qualified dentist Anushika Sharma acquired her first dental practice. In January 2007 she acquired a second practice and in July 2007 she was provided with an opportunity to purchase a third. This opportunity prompted a family meeting to discuss Anushika’s expanding empire. Jagesh Sharma (Sunny), Keshbala Sharma and Rajesh Sharma (Anushika’s then husband, mother-in-law and brother-in-law respectively) and Anushika were in attendance. During this meeting it was determined that a company (ADC Ltd) would be set up to purchase the third practice rather than Anushika doing this ...
John Rimmer summarises Harper v Simpson, which sheds light on whether the Duomatic principle applies to beneficial shareholders ‘The court preferred the more modern view that orthodox thinking was now that the Duomatic principle does not apply to actions of a beneficial shareholder, but only to a legal (registered) shareholder.’ Every law student learns that …
Continue reading "Offshore: Share and share alike"
This post is only available to members.
John Rimmer summarises Harper v Simpson, which sheds light on whether the Duomatic principle applies to beneficial shareholders Every law student learns that a company is a separate legal person from its members and that the management of the company is carried on by the directors. Yet the voting members of a company can make …
Continue reading "Offshore: Share and share alike"
This post is only available to members.
