• At Kemp Little, we are known for our ability to serve the very particular needs of a large but diverse technology client base. Our hands-on industry know-how makes us a good fit with many of the world's biggest technology and digital media businesses, yet means we are equally relevant to companies with a technology bias, in sectors such as professional services, financial services, retail, travel and healthcare.
  • Kemp Little specialises in the technology and digital media sectors and provides a range of legal services that are crucial to fast-moving, innovative businesses.Our blend of sector awareness, technical excellence and responsiveness, means we are regularly ranked as a leading firm by directories such as Legal 500, Chambers and PLC Which Lawyer. Our practice areas cover a wide range of legal issues and advice.
  • Our Commercial Technology team has established itself as one of the strongest in the UK. We are ranked in Legal 500, Chambers & Partners and PLC Which Lawyer, with four of our partners recommended.
  • Our team provides practical and commercial advice founded on years of experience and technical know-how to technology and digital media companies that need to be alert to the rules and regulations of competition law.
  • Our Corporate Practice has a reputation for delivering sound legal advice, backed up with extensive industry experience and credentials, to get the best results from technology and digital media transactions.
  • In the fast-changing world of employment law our clients need practical, commercial and cost-effective advice. They get this from our team of employment law professionals.
  • Our team of leading IP advisors deliver cost-effective, strategic and commercial advice to ensure that your IP assets are protected and leveraged to add real value to your business.
  • Our litigation practice advises on all aspects of dispute resolution, with a particular focus on ownership, exploitation and infringement of intellectual property rights and commercial disputes in the technology sector.
  • We have an industry-leading reputation for our outsourcing expertise. Our professionals deliver credible legal advice to providers and acquirers of IT and business process outsourcing (BPO) services.
  • We work alongside companies, many with disruptive technologies, that seek funding, as well as with the venture capital firms, institutional investors and corporate ventures that want to invest in exciting business opportunities.
  • Our regulatory specialists work alongside Kemp Little’s corporate and commercial professionals to help meet their compliance obligations.
  • With a service that is commercial and responsive to our clients’ needs, you will find our tax advice easy to understand, cost-effective and geared towards maximising your tax benefits.
  • At Kemp Little, we advise clients in diverse sectors where technology is fundamental to the ongoing success of their businesses.They include companies that provide technology as a service and businesses where the use of technology is key to their business model, enabling them to bring their product or service to market.
  • We bring our commercial understanding of digital business models, our legal expertise and our reputation for delivering high quality, cost-effective services to this dynamic sector.
  • Acting for market leaders and market changers within the media industry, we combine in-depth knowledge of the structural technology that underpins content delivery and the impact of digitisation on the rights of producers and consumers.
  • We understand the risks facing this sector and work with our clients to conquer those challenges. Testimony to our success is the continued growth in our team of professionals and the clients we serve.
  • We advise at the forefront of the technological intersection between life sciences and healthcare. We advise leading technology and data analytics providers, healthcare institutions as well as manufacturers of medical devices, pharmaceuticals and biotechnological products.
  • For clients operating in the online sector, our teams are structured to meet their commercial, financing, M&A, competition and regulatory, employment and intellectual property legal needs.
  • Our focus on technology makes us especially well positioned to give advice on the legal aspects of digital marketing. We advise on high-profile, multi-channel, cross-border cases and on highly complex campaigns.
  • The mobile and telecoms sector is fast changing and hugely dependent on technology advances. We help mobile and wireless and fixed telecoms clients to tackle the legal challenges that this evolving sector presents.
  • Whether ERP, Linux or Windows; software or infrastructure as a service in the cloud, in a virtualised environment, or as a mobile or service-oriented architecture, we have the experience to resolve legal issues across the spectrum of commercial computer platforms.
  • Our clients trust us to apply our solutions and know-how to help them make the best use of technology in structuring deals, mitigating key risks to their businesses and in achieving their commercial objectives.
  • We have extensive experience of advising customers and suppliers in the retail sector on technology development, licensing and supply projects, and in advising on all aspects of procurement and online operations.
  • Our legal professionals work alongside social media providers and users in relation to the commercial, privacy, data, advertising, intellectual property, employment and corporate issues that arise in this dynamic sector.
  • Our years of working alongside diverse software clients have given us an in-depth understanding of the dynamics of the software marketplace, market practice and alternative negotiating strategies.
  • Working with direct providers of travel services, including aggregators, facilitators and suppliers of transport and technology, our team has developed a unique specialist knowledge of the sector
  • Your life as an entrepreneur is full of daily challenges as you seek to grow your business. One of the key strengths of our firm is that we understand these challenges.
  • Kemp Little is trusted by some of the world’s leading luxury brands and some of the most innovative e-commerce retailers changing the face of the industry.
  • HR Bytes is an exclusive, comprehensive, online service that will provide you with a wide range of practical, insightful and current employment law information. HR Bytes members get priority booking for events, key insight and a range of employment materials for free.
  • FlightDeck is our portal designed especially with start-up and emerging technology businesses in mind to help you get your business up and running in the right way. We provide a free pack of all the things no-one tells you and things they don’t give away to get you started.

Wrongful dismissal and bad leaver provision

In the recent case of Richards & Anor v IP Solutions Group Ltd [2016] the court considered whether two founder directors were wrongfully dismissed and also the operation of a bad leaver provision as set out in the company’s articles of association. The case deals with an investor director (appointed as a representative of a private equity house) and the independent non-executive director (“NED”) summarily dismissing two founder directors in a board meeting on grounds of serious breaches by the directors of their duties as employees and directors.  The founder directors each held 30% of the shareholding in IP Solutions Group Ltd (the “Company”).  As per the bad leaver provision in the Company’s articles of association, on being summarily dismissed the sale price of the leaver’s shares was £1 in aggregate for all the sale shares.  Following their dismissal, the founder directors were notified that their 30% shareholding was to be transferred to the Company for an aggregate of £1 under the bad leaver provision.

The issues that Mrs Justice May DBE considered were:

  1. If the two founder directors were wrongfully dismissed; and
  2. if the Company was summarily entitled to dismiss the founder directors, was the bad leaver provision a penalty and therefore no effect?

The primary disagreement between the founder directors and the investor arose in relation to the calculation of the bonus. The bonus to the founder directors was calculated on a pre-agreed accounting model which was a complex model.  Following Q1, the finance director and the investor’s representative initially thought that the Q1 target was reached. The founder directors were paid a fixed bonus (albeit without the formal approval by the board through a board meeting). However, after further detailed calculation by the investor, it was concluded that the test had failed for Q1, but was likely to pass for the upcoming quarter. The founder directors accepted this, but instead of repaying the Q1 bonus, they offered for the bonus to be off-set in the future quarter. The investor was also not happy about the progress of the business. The investor and the independent NED planned ahead of a board meeting and summarily dismissed both the founder directors.

The main issue turned on whether (i) the directors breached their statutory duties; and (ii) if the Company was entitled to summarily dismiss them. The investor’s counsel argued that as per their employment contracts, their statutory duties were in effect a strict liability on the directors. 

It was concluded that the founder directors were wrongfully dismissed. It was accepted by the founder directors that retaining the Q1 bonus breached their statutory duty, but it was not a material breach. The other breaches quoted by the investor’s counsel were also held to be insignificant.

Though it was not necessary to decide on issue #2 above, the judge set out briefly the tentative conclusions she would have reached on this issue. She considered the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Cavendish Square Holding BV v. Makdessi [2015] and the reasoning of each of the justices in that case.  She concluded that the arrangement for "Leavers" as provided for under the articles of association was more akin to a primary obligation agreed between parties for distinct commercial reasons to do with a shareholder leaving the Company. On this basis the price of £1 payable for the aggregate shareholding of a person who is a "bad leaver" is simply the agreed price on transfer. Even if the transfer and pricing provisions in the articles were to be construed as secondary obligations consequent upon breach of the employment contract, there was nothing unconscionable in an arrangement arrived at between parties dealing at arms-length with the benefit of extensive expert advice. The judge concluded that “had it been necessary, therefore, I would have found that the Transfer provisions relating to a "Bad Leaver" were enforceable”.

Contact our experts for further advice

Vidya Rao, Andy Moseby