Redefining Balance: A Fresh Take on Unfair Prejudice Remedy in UK Corporate Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18533/2ndwmz93Keywords:
Minority Shareholder Protection, UK law, Unfair Prejudice, Legal Remedies, Majority-Minority Shareholder Disputes, Corporate Conflict ResolutionAbstract
Ownership structures in companies can be broadly categorized into majority shareholders, who wield substantial control due to significant share ownership, and minority shareholders, facing challenges influencing corporate operations due to their limited share ownership. Regulated by s994 of the UK Companies Act (2006), this division of influence underlines an existing issue. This article critically evaluates the effectiveness and limitations of the unfair prejudice remedy within the UK's legal framework. A central concern lies in the disparities in shareholder influence, particularly for minority shareholders with less than 50% of voting rights, who grapple with hurdles when attempting to shape important corporate decisions. As the remedy is reevaluated and enhanced, the objective is to fortify the protection of minority shareholder rights, mitigate financial burdens, and refine court discretion. The research contributes to the evolution of corporate governance in the UK by delving into pivotal cases that highlight the complex factors considered by courts and the extension of entitlements beyond a company's articles of association. Strategic solutions proposed in the article, encompassing precise claim estimates and active case management, draw from both established legal practices and innovative ideas. Striking a delicate balance between minority shareholder rights and seamless corporate operations is imperative. The future of the unfair prejudice remedy depends on effectively addressing acknowledged challenges and refining the litigation process. Through these enhancements, the remedy can continue to protect minority shareholder rights efficiently and fairly.
References
Cases:
Atlasview Ltd v Brightview Ltd. (2004). vLex. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://vlex.co.uk/vid/atlasview-ltd-v-brightview-793435409
Bermuda Cablevision Ltd and Others v Colica Trust Company Ltd. (1997). vLex. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://bm.vlex.com/vid/bermuda-cablevision-ltd-and-803285881
Bilkus v King and Another. (2003). vLex. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://vlex.co.uk/vid/bilkus-v-king-and-793649857
Bovey Hotel Ventures Ltd, Re. (1983). St John’s Champers. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://www.stjohnschambers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Unfair-prejudice-petitions-and-derivative-actions.pdf
Foss v Harbottle. (1843). vLex. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://vlex.co.uk/vid/foss-v-harbottle-806239249
Grace v Biagioli and Others. (2005). vLex. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://vlex.co.uk/vid/grace-v-biagioli-and-793174389
Legal Costs Negotiators Ltd, Re B.C.C. 547. (1999). Practical Law. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/D-0234424?contextData=(sc.Default)&transitionType=Default&firstPage=true
O’Neill v Phillips. (1999). vLex. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://vlex.co.uk/vid/neill-v-phillips-792569057
Peter Hook v Bernard Sumner and Ors (Defendant-Applicant). (2015). vLex. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://vlex.co.uk/vid/peter-hook-v-bernard-793286237
Petition of Nigel Gray and Others for Orders Pursuant to Sections 994 and 996 of the Companies Act 2006 In Respect Of Braid Group (holdings) Limited. (2015). vLex. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://vlex.co.uk/vid/gray-and-others-petitioners-802145937
RA Noble & Sons (Clothing) Ltd. (1983). Oxbridge Notes. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://www.oxbridgenotes.co.uk/law_cases/re-noble-and-sons-clothing-ltd
Ravenhart Service (Holdings) Ltd, Re, Reiner v Gershinson. (2004). vLex. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://vlex.co.uk/vid/ravenhart-service-holdings-ltd-793664649
Re a Company (No 007623). (1986). Swarb. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://swarb.co.uk/re-a-company-no-007623-of-1986-1986/
Re a Company (No: 008699) 2 BCC 99,024. (1985).
Re Bird Precision Bellows Ltd. (1985). vLex. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://vlex.co.uk/vid/re-bird-precision-bellows-793664025
Re Cardiff City Football Club (Holdings) Ltd. (2022). Gatehouse Champers. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://gatehouselaw.co.uk/isaac-v-1-tan-2-cardiff-city-football-club-holdings-ltd-2022-ewhc-2023-ch/
Re Elgindata Ltd (No 2). (1992). vLex. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://vlex.co.uk/vid/re-elgindata-ltd-no-793644329
Re Freudiana Music Co Ltd. (1993). Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/lawcom-prod-storage11jsxou24uy7q/uploads/2015/03/lc246_Shareholder_Remedies.pdf
Re Grandactual Ltd. (2005). LexisNexis. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from
Re Hailley Group Ltd. (1992). Swarb. https://swarb.co.uk/lisc/Cmpny19921992.php
Re Legal Costs Negotiators Ltd. (1998, May 28). vLex. Retrieved August 4, 2023, from https://vlex.co.uk/vid/re-legal-costs-negotiators-804752949
Re Saul D Harrison & Sons plc. (1995). Retrieved August 4, 2023, from https://swarb.co.uk/in-re-saul-d-harrison-and-sons-plc-ca-1995/
Scottish Co-operative Wholesale Society Ltd v Meyer. (1959). Swarb. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://swarb.co.uk/scottish-co-operative-wholesale-society-ltd-v-meyer-hl-1959/
Stewarts (Brixton) Ltd, Re. (1985).
Legislations:
Companies Act, (1948). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/11-12/38/section/210/enacted
Companies Act. (1980). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/22/contents/enacted
Companies Act. (1985). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/6/contents
Companies Act. (2006). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/contents
Other References:
Dignam, A., & Lowry, J. (2009). Foundational and Constitutional Issues in Company Law. University of London, Section D: Company Law Constitutional Issues II, 23–40.
Fan, Z. (2020). Unfair Prejudice in United Kingdom Company Law. Asian Journal of Humanities and Social Studies, 9(1), 27–37. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/30f7/d6db1c0c63263bf0f265b3026364b652bd6d.pdf
Flourentzou, N. (n.d.). Minority Shareholders: Applicability of Unfair Prejudice.
Goo, S. (2012). Minority Shareholders’ Protection. In Routledge eBooks.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781843143574
Koh, A. K. (2022). Shareholder Withdrawal in Close Corporations: An Anglo-German Comparative Analysis. The Journal of Corporate Law Studies, 22(1), 197–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2021.2012883
LI, Z. (2022). An Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Unfair Prejudice Remedy in UK Company Law: How Can We Guarantee Appropriate Judicial Discretion? Cambridge Law Review, 7(2), 72–102.
https://www.cambridgelawreview.org/_files/ugd/fb0f90_a580c08697994712bcced88bd257da18.pdf?index=true
Marsden, A. (2021). Shareholder Protection from Unfair Prejudice: Case and Statute Citator 2021. Commercial Chambers. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/shareholder-protection-from-unfair-prejudice-case-statute-marsden/
Miller, S. (1999). How Should U.K. and U.S. Minority Shareholder Remedies for Unfairly Prejudicial or Oppressive Conduct Be Reformed? American Business Law Journal, 36(4), 579–632.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1714.1999.tb00264.x
Newington-Bridges, C. (2016). A Practical Guide to Unfair Prejudice Petitions and their Interaction with Derivative Claims. https://www.stjohnschambers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Unfair-prejudice-petitions-and-derivative-actions.pdf
Nicholls, T. (2022, March). Unfair Prejudice: Recent Developments. Global Law Firm | Norton Rose Fulbright. Retrieved August 20, 2023, from
Nwafor, A. O. (2011). The Unfair Prejudice Remedy – A Relief for the Minority Shareholders. University of Botswana Law Journal, 13, 37–54. https://www.pulp.up.ac.za/journals/university-of-botswana-law-journal-volume-13-december-2011
Palombo, D. (2022). The Future of the Corporation: The Avenues for Legal Change. Journal of the British Academy, 10s5, 043–086. https://doi.org/10.5871/jba/010s5.043
Perkins, A. (2018). Guide to Unfair Prejudice Against Shareholders.
https://www.ashfords.co.uk/insights/articles/guide-to-unfair-prejudice-against-shareholders
Reisberg, A. (2008). Derivative Claims under the Companies Act 2006: Much ado about nothing? Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm?abstractid=1092629
Shareholder Remedies Report (Law Com No 246). (1997, October 24). Law Commission. Retrieved August 9, 2023, from https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/document/shareholder-remedies-report/
Stewart-Ornstein, N. (2020, April 24). Arbitrating Oppression: Fulham, Dickson and the Unfair Prejudice Remedy. Arbitration Blog. Retrieved August 20, 2023, from http://arbitrationblog.practicallaw.com/arbitrating-oppression-fulham-dickson-and-the-unfair-prejudice-remedy
Stewart-Ornstein, N. (2020, April 24). Arbitrating Oppression: Fulham, Dickson and the Unfair Prejudice Remedy. Arbitration Blog. Retrieved August 20, 2023, from http://arbitrationblog.practicallaw.com/arbitrating-oppression-fulham-dickson-and-the-unfair-prejudice-remedy
Tan, Z. (2014). Unfair Prejudice from Beyond, Beyond Unfair Prejudice: Amplifying Minority Protection in Corporate Group Structures. The Journal of Corporate Law Studies.
https://doi.org/10.5235/14735970.14.2.367
Whitaker, J., Ode, R., & Brown, M. (2022, July 2). Developments in Unfair Prejudice Litigation. The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. Retrieved August 5, 2023, from
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2022/07/02/developments-in-unfair-prejudice- litigation/#14
Worthington, S. (2016). Sealy & Worthington’s Text, Cases, and Materials in Company Law.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Suhaib Zada
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).