*/
Company – Take-over bid. The claimant companies had been beneficial shareholders in the defendant company. The directors of the defendant imposed restrictions on the claimants under Pt 22 of the Companies Act 2006 and pursuant to its articles of association. The claimants commenced derivative actions challenging those restrictions. The defendant's submission that the claimants had not had standing to bring the claims was dismissed by the Chancery Division. The claimants succeeded in part. The defendant and one of the claimants appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the defendant's appeal, holding that the defendant's power to impose the restrictions had not been used for an improper purpose. The claimant's submission that the judge had erred in finding that the disclosure notices issued under s 793 of the Act had been valid was dismissed, as was its submission that the judge had erred in finding that the defendant had had reasonable cause to believe that the claimant's disclosure had been false or materially incorrect.
Company – Take-over bid. The claimant companies had been beneficial shareholders in the defendant company. The directors of the defendant imposed restrictions on the claimants under Pt 22 of the Companies Act 2006 and pursuant to its articles of association. The claimants commenced derivative actions challenging those restrictions. The defendant's submission that the claimants had not had standing to bring the claims was dismissed by the Chancery Division. The claimants succeeded in part. The defendant and one of the claimants appealed. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the defendant's appeal, holding that the defendant's power to impose the restrictions had not been used for an improper purpose. The claimant's submission that the judge had erred in finding that the disclosure notices issued under s 793 of the Act had been valid was dismissed, as was its submission that the judge had erred in finding that the defendant had had reasonable cause to believe that the claimant's disclosure had been false or materially incorrect.
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
A career shaped by advocacy beyond her practice, and the realities of living with an invisible disability – Dr Natasha Shotunde, Black Barristers’ Network Co-Founder and its Chair for seven years, reflects on a decade at the Bar
The odds of success are as unforgiving as ever, but ambition clearly isn’t in short supply. David Wurtzel’s annual deep‑dive into the competition cohort shows who’s entering, who’s thriving and the trends that will define the next wave
Where to start and where to find help? Monisha Shah, Chair of the King’s Counsel Selection Panel, provides an overview of the silk selection process, debunking some myths along the way
Do chatbot providers owe a duty of care for negligent misstatements? Jasper Wong suggests that the principles applicable to humans should apply equally to machines
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
