Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Company and Partnership Practice > Members, meetings and disputes > Flashcards

Members, meetings and disputes Flashcards

1
Q

What can the right to become a new member result/arise from?

A

A contract between the company and the allotee of new shares or arise where an existing member transfer shares or where shares pass to personal representatives or a trustee in bankruptcy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

With the exception of subscribers, no person will become a member of a company until…

A

His name is entered on the register

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Barry and Knight Ltd and Anor v Knight 2014

A

Access to the register of members does not have to be given if one of the purposes of the request is not a proper one

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What does the no notice of any trust shall be entered rule mean in practice?

A

That the company must treat the registered holder of shares as beneficially entitled to those shares even if it knows that they are held on trust

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Pender v Lushington 1877 (2)

A
  • the company must pay dividends to the trustee and allow the trustee to exercise any voting powers attached to the shares
  • a member can exercise his voting rights in any way he chooses, to the exclusion of any conflicting rights of the members
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What does the registered holder of the shares who is a trustee have to do?

A

Account to the beneficiary for any dividend he receives and vote in accordance with the beneficiary’s instructions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Burns v Siemens Brother Dynamo Works Ltd 1918

A

The court may order rectification of the registrar of members if it’s just and equitable (like here with joint holders where only the first named can vote)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Which powers are exercisable by the members?

A

Powers of the company which not have been or cannot be delegated to the members

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Powers of the members exercisable by virtue of statute (4)

A
  • alteration of company’s articles
  • appointment and removal of auditors
  • removal of directors
  • winding up of the company
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Standard Chartered Bank v Walker 1992

A

Court may order a creditor to vote in a certain way to protect creditors

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Barron v Potter 1914

A

If the directors are unable to act (e.g. because of their personal interests), their powers will revert to the shareholders

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What are the members not allowed to commit?

A

A fraud on the minority, so e.g. an alteration to the articles will be invalid if it discriminates against some of the members

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Clemens v Clemens Brothers Ltd 1976

A

A fiduciary duty to act bona fide in the benefit of the company as a whole arises where voting rights are capable of being exercised in an oppressive manner

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Where any provision of CA 2006 requires a resolution and does not specify what kind of resolution…

A

An ordinary resolution will be required unless the company’s articles stipulate otherwise

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is the common factor for circumstances in which special resolutions are required?

A

They are matters on which minority shareholders need protection

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

The business of a GM cannot be properly transacted or relied upon unless…

A

Proper notice has been given

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

As regards notices, where there are shareholders who are not directors, it may be advisable to include with the notice a…

A

Circular setting out the reasons for the proposed resolution and the views of the directors

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

The only business that can be transacted at the meeting is the business…

A

Of which a notice has been given

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Musselwhite v C H Musselwhite and Son Ltd 1962

A

A deliberate omission to give notice of a meeting, even if grounded on a mistaken belief, will invalidate the meeting

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Smith v Butler 2012

A

Court ordered a meeting to be held at which one shareholder - chairman - constituted a quorum, in spirit of the articles though

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

The function of the chair

A

To ensure that the business of the meeting is conducted in an efficient manner and it is his duty to preserve order

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Standard Chartered Bank v Walker 1992

A

Court had the power to grant an injunction to prevent a shareholder from voting if, without the injunction, there would be injury to the company

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

In the event of the equality of votes, CA and MA do…

A

Not permit the chair to have a casting vote at GMs

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Re Duomatic Ltd 1969

A

A decision taken at a meeting properly conducted will bind the company the same way as the passing of a formal resolution at a GM provided that the matter is intra vires the company

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Because of the Duomatic principle, if all the directors are also all the members…

A

They can unanimously pass a resolution in board meetings which should strictly have been passed at a GM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Where does the Duomatic principle not operate?

A

Where the interests of others with a legitimate interest in the procedure are involved

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Is it possible to dispense with a meeting to remove a director or auditor?

A

No

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Does the Duomatic principle override the requirement for a special resolution approving a purchase of own shares

A

No

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Henry and Another v Finch and Another Subnom Re Finch (UK) plc (in Liquidation) 2015

A

The Duomatic principle not applicable where the company in question is insolvent or the creditors are at risk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Sharma v Sharma 2014

A

Duomatic can be used to establish assent to a director’s conflict of interest

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Randhawa and Another v Turpin and Another 2017

A

Appeal, Duomatic requires the assent of all registered shareholders and here one of them was incapable of consenting, consent cannot be inferred

32
Q

Which companies can pass written resolutions?

A

Only private companies

33
Q

Who are eligible members for the purposes of written resolutions?

A

Those members who would have been entitled to vote on the resolution on the circulation date of the resolution

34
Q

A private company can use the written resolution procedure to do anything which can be done in a GM except for:

A

Removing a director/auditor before the expiration of his term of office

35
Q

Once a member has signified his agreement to a written resolution…

A

It cannot be revoked

36
Q

The power of shareholders to remove directors by ordinary resolution…

A

Overrides anything in the company’s articles

37
Q

A shareholder who wants to propose a resolution for the removal of a director under s168 must…

A

Give special notice in accordance with s312

38
Q

Two ways in which the effectiveness of s168 (removal of director) is reduced

A
  • the director is not deprived of any right to compensation or damages which he may have
  • the articles may validly give special voting rights to some of the shareholders either generally or in special circumstances
39
Q

Bushell v Faith 1970

A

A clause giving a director that is proposed to be removed 3 votes per share held to be valid

40
Q

If a shareholders’ agreement had the effect of altering the articles…

A

It would be registrable because of s30 CA

41
Q

When a wrong is done to a company…

A

It is up to the company as a separate legal entity to take action and not a member in his own name

42
Q

The Foss v Harbottle rule is…

A

Intended to prevent a multiplicity of actions and is a statement of majority rule, closely allied to the ratification by majority shareholders of directors’ unauthorised acts

43
Q

Exceptions where a member may sue to remedy a wrong done to the company (5)

A
  • the majority exercise their votes so as to defraud the minority shareholders
  • the company is proposing to act ultra vires or illegaly
  • the company has purported to pass an ordinary resolution where special resolution is required
  • the company proposes to act on the authority of a resolution which is defective as a result of inadequate notice
  • the court decides that an action by a member is in the interests of justice
44
Q

Foss v Harbottle 1843

A

When a wrong is done to a company, it is up to it as a separate legal entity to take action and not a member in their own name

45
Q

Johnson v Gore Wood and Co Ltd 2001

A

An individual may not bring a personal action against a wrongdoer for reflective loss e.g. a reduction in the value of one’s shares caused by a wrong committed against the company

46
Q

Giles v Rhind 2003

A

Exception to the reflective loss principle, action possible if loss so devastating it leaves the company unable to pursue a claim

47
Q

Gardner v Parker 2004

A

The reflective loss principle bars double recovery

48
Q

Simpson v Westminster Palace Hotel Co 1860

A

A member can bring an action in his own name to prevent a company acting ultra vires

49
Q

Pender v Lushington 1877

A

A member can bring an action in his own name to enforce his right to vote

50
Q

Alexander v Automatic Telephone Co 1900

A

A derivative action will lie even where the directors believe they are doing no wrong but the court considers they are in breach of duty

51
Q

Cook v Deeks 1916

A

Court will not necessarily apply the principle of majority rule to permit a GM to ratify an unauthorised act of the director where they control the company

52
Q

Airey v Cordell and Ors 2006

A

To bring a derivative action, the court must be satisfied that a reasonable board of directors would have been of the view that it is appropriate for the minority to bring proceedings

53
Q

Personal action

A

A member may bring an action in his own name to enforce his right

54
Q

Representative action

A

This is similar to personal action except that an action may be brought by a member on behalf of himself and others to enforce their collective personal rights where all such members have a common interest

55
Q

Derivative action

A

An action by a member in the name of himself and all other members to remedy a wrong done to the company, can be used where the company is defrauded by insiders who control its affairs and who use their control to prevent an action being brought by the company

56
Q

Where a member is able to bring an action under one of the exceptions to Foss v Harbottle, he is really doing so…

A

On behalf of the company and his interests are the same as those of the other shareholders

57
Q

In derivative claims under CA, the court is required to take the view of…

A

An uninterested shareholder, which makes it harder for a shareholder to bring a claim against the general wishes of the shareholder body

58
Q

Re Bird Precision Bellows Ltd 1986

A

The s994 remedy is restricted to a member’s capacity as a member but his interests may extend beyond mere rights attaching to shares

59
Q

Re Bovey Hotel Ventures Ltd 1982

A

UP possible in a husband-wife quasi-partnership

60
Q

Re Noble & Sons (Clothing) Ltd 1983

A

Test for UP: a reasonable bystander, observing all the consequences of the respondent’s conduct, would regard it as having unfairly prejudiced the petitioner’s interests

61
Q

Re Soundcraft Magnetics Ltd ex p Nicholas 1992

A

UP test must be judged objectively

62
Q

The ability of a shareholder to complain successfully of unfair prejudice depends to a large extent on whether the company is…

A

A quasi partnership

63
Q

Ebrahimi v Westbourne Galleries 1973

A

Test for a quasi partnership: whether the company is formed on the basis of personal relationships between the members
If it is, and a ‘partner’ is excluded from the management of the business, the company can be wound up

64
Q

Re Coroin Ltd 2013

A

A company comprising of only 4 shareholders who are very sophisticated investors bound by carefully drafted articles and shareholders agreements not a QP

65
Q

Sikorski v Sikorski 2012

A

Two parties entered into a specific bargain about dividends, when departed from, UP

66
Q

Re Saul D Harrison & Sons Plc 1995

A

Conduct contrary to the articles might be unfair and conduct in accordance with the articles might be unfair when the shareholder has legitimate expectations not reflected in the articles

67
Q

Re Saul D Harrison & Sons Plc 1995 - fairness must be considered in the context of various factors:

A
  • the commercial context
  • the contents of the articles and the powers of the board
  • the shareholder’s legitimate expectation beyond what has been stated in the articles
68
Q

O’Neill and Another v Phillips and Others 1999

A

Unfairness to members occurs only if there had been a breach of the agreed terms on which the affairs of the company were to be conducted

69
Q

Is it possible for a petition issued by a shareholder of a holding company to be founded on conduct relating to its subsidiary?

A

Yes

70
Q

Wootliff v Rushton-Turner and Others 2016

A

Claim for UP can be pursued in tandem with a claim for wrongful dismissal

71
Q

Re Home and Office Fire Extinguishers Ltd 2012

A

Sometimes, the court will order the respondent to sell his shares to the petitioner (no discount)

72
Q

Re Red Rock Goldmining Co Ltd 1889

A

Even if the majority shareholder wants to keep the company going, an objecting minority may still successfully petition for winding up if objects unachievable

73
Q

Re Yenidje Tobacco Co 1916

A

Company that is a QP can be wound up if there is a deadlock between the ‘partners’ even if it’s highly profitable

74
Q

Loch v John Blackwood Ltd 1924

A

QP can be wound up if the member ‘lacks confidence’ in another resulting from a wrongdoing

75
Q

For a company to be wound up where the conduct of the company’s affairs is oppressive to some part of the membership…

A

The petitioner mus show a continuous process of oppression

76
Q

Grounds for equitable and just winding up (4)

A
  • the company can no longer, or never could, achieve its main object
  • the company was formed to resemble a QP and there are grounds that would justify the dissolution of a true partnership
  • one ‘partner’ is excluded from managing the business
  • the conduct of the company’s affairs is oppressive to some part of the membership

Company and Partnership Practice (20 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions