On 29 January 2021, the Kemp Little team joined Deloitte Legal. Click here to view the press release.

As of 30 January 2021, Kemp Little LLP ceased to operate as a firm of solicitors and practice law and ceased to be regulated and authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

Kemp Little LLP has been re-named KL Heritage LLP.

If you are looking to contact a specific individual to seek legal advice or in respect of any other business relationship, please contact Deloitte Legal.

If you are seeking to contact the old Kemp Little LLP in relation to a previous business relationship or matter, please get in touch with KL Heritage LLP.

For enquiries relating to Kemp Little technology products and training portal, please email deloittelegal@deloitte.co.uk

 


 

Kemp Little is a trade name used under licence by KL Heritage LLP (formerly Kemp Little LLP, registered number OC300242 and VAT number 182 8854 65).

On 29 January 2021, the Kemp Little team joined Deloitte Legal.  As of 30 January 2021, Kemp Little ceased to operate as a firm of solicitors and practice law. From this date Kemp Little ceased to be authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and is being re-named KL Heritage LLP.

All references to Kemp Little herein are references to KL Heritage LLP, which used to carry on business in that name.

KL Heritage LLP is not connected to or associated with Deloitte Legal or Deloitte LLP in any capacity.

 

Kemp Little
  • Looking for someone?
  • Email us
  • Search
MENU MENU
Insights overview

Corporate · 23 September 2015 · Andy Moseby

M&A Diligence: the Court’s “imaginative solution” on an unfair prejudice claim

In the recent case of Thomas v Dawson [2015] EWCA Civ 706, the Court of Appeal held that even though the High Court’s solution to an unfair… Read more

more content below

In the recent case of Thomas v Dawson [2015] EWCA Civ 706, the Court of Appeal held that even though the High Court’s solution to an unfair prejudice claim was “in certain respects unusual”, it nevertheless upheld the granting of an option to acquire a 50% stake in a business at a significant value, even though evidence was put to the Court showing that the company was balance sheet insolvent.

Mr Thomas and Ms Dawson were, together, the sole directors and shareholders of Invicta Care Homes Limited (“Invicta”), each holding 50% of the equity.  Their joint management of Invicta broke down after each of them made unauthorised withdrawals from Incita’s bank account and ensuing litigation on both sides led to judgements against each for the missing sums and to an interim order finding unfair prejudice under the Companies Act 2006 (“Companies Act”).  A shareholder may petition the Court for relief under section 994 of the Companies Act citing unfair prejudice where the affairs of the company are conducted in a manner which is unfairly prejudicial to her interests as a shareholder (or where an actual or proposed act or omission is or would be prejudicial).  If the Courts finds that the petition is well founded and that unfair prejudice is made out, it may make “such order as it thinks fit for giving general relief in respect of the matters complained of” (under section 996 of the Companies Act).

Once unfair prejudice has been established, the most common remedy is for the shares of the member bringing the petition to be acquired by the other shareholders at a value determined by the Court.  So it was in the Thomas case, with the Court permitting the parties to present to the Court valuation evidence from a jointly-appointed expert.  Read together with Invicta’s accounts, the expert’s report showed that Invicta was actually balance sheet insolvent, as the reported value of the business (£480,000) had to be set against the aggregate of its liabilities (more than £850,000).  Despite this, the High Court decided that the company had value to Thomas, not least because – by becoming sole shareholder and director – he would be in a position to enforce the derivative judgement against Dawson and secure non-enforcement of the larger derivative judgement against himself.  The relief granted was an option for Thomas to acquire Dawson’s entire shareholding for £55,000.

Thomas appealed.  However, given the wide scope of the discretion afforded to the Court under section 996 of the Companies Act, the Court of Appeal was of the view that the question to be determined was not whether the judge’s analysis was correct (as there may have been any number of reasonable ways in which the Court could have deal with the problem) but rather “whether his analysis falls short of a proper exercise of the broad discretion to fashion a just solution”.  On that basis, the first instance judgement was held to be well within the statutory power granted to the Court and the appeal was dismissed.

Comment

The Thomas case shows that even if armed with a third party valuation, there is no certainty as to the outcome of an unfair prejudice claim.  The Court’s wide discretion when determining relief can lead to some novel orders, if the Court believes the proposed solution is a just and fair one.

For more information, please contact Andy Moseby, Corporate partner

  • Share this blog

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linkedin

Andy MosebyAndy Moseby is a corporate partner

Get in touch

View the team

Sign up for our newsletters

  • Share this Blog

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linkedin

Other stuff you might like

  1. Data first: How tech startups build trust and tap investment | CityA.M
  2. UK’s Gaming Industry – what are the key considerations and how can Kemp Little help?
  3. Finding the right co-founder for your tech startup | ITPRO.
The hottest topics in technology
  • Adtech & martech
  • Agile
  • Artificial intelligence
  • EBA outsourcing
  • Brexit
  • Cloud computing
  • Complex & sensitive investigations
  • Connectivity
  • Cryptocurrencies & blockchain
  • Cybersecurity
  • Data analytics & big data
  • Data breaches
  • Data rights
  • Digital commerce
  • Digital content risk
  • Digital health
  • Digital media
  • Digital infrastructure & telecoms
  • Emerging businesses
  • Financial services
  • Fintech
  • Gambling
  • GDPR
  • KLick DPO
  • KLick Trade Mark
  • Open banking
  • Retail
  • SMCR
  • Software & services
  • Sourcing
  • Travel
close
The hottest topics in technology
  • Adtech & martech
  • Agile
  • Artificial intelligence
  • EBA outsourcing
  • Brexit
  • Cloud computing
  • Complex & sensitive investigations
  • Connectivity
  • Cryptocurrencies & blockchain
  • Cybersecurity
  • Data analytics & big data
  • Data breaches
  • Data rights
  • Digital commerce
  • Digital content risk
  • Digital health
  • Digital media
  • Digital infrastructure & telecoms
  • Emerging businesses
  • Financial services
  • Fintech
  • Gambling
  • GDPR
  • KLick DPO
  • KLick Trade Mark
  • Open banking
  • Retail
  • SMCR
  • Software & services
  • Sourcing
  • Travel
Kemp Little

Lawyers
and thought leaders who are passionate about technology

Expand footer

Kemp Little

138 Cheapside
City of London
EC2V 6BJ

020 7600 8080

hello@kemplittle.com

Services

  • Commercial technology
  • Consulting
  • Disputes
  • Intellectual property
  • Employment
  • Immigration

 

  • Sourcing
  • Corporate
  • Data protection & privacy
  • Financial regulation
  • Private equity & venture capital
  • Tax

Sitemap

  • Our people
  • Insights
  • Events
  • About us
  • Contact us
  • Cookies
  • Privacy
  • Terms of use
  • Complaints
  • Debt recovery charges

Follow us

  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • FlightDeck
  • Sign up for our newsletters

Kemp Little LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales (registered number OC300242) and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Its registered office is 138 Cheapside, London EC2V 6BJ. The SRA Standards and Regulations can be accessed by clicking here.

  • Cyber Essentials logo
  • LORCA logo
  • ABTA Partner+ logo
  • Make Your Ask logo
  • FT Innovative Lawyers 2019 winners logo
  • Law Society Excellence Awards shortlisted
  • Legal Business Awards = highly commended
  • Home
  • Our people
  • Services
    • Business restructuring and reorganisation
    • Commercial technology
    • Consulting
    • Corporate
    • Data protection & privacy
    • Digital content & reputation risk
    • Disputes
    • Employment
    • Financial regulation
    • Immigration
    • Innovation
    • Intellectual property
    • Private equity & venture capital
    • Sourcing
    • Tax
    • Travel
  • Resources
  • Insights
  • Covid 19: Your Business Continuity
  • Events
  • About us
    • Who we are
    • Our social responsibilities
    • Our partnerships
    • Join us
  • Contact us
  • FlightDeck
  • Sign up for our newsletters
  • Follow us
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn
close
close
close

Send us a message

Fill in your details and we'll be in touch soon

[contact-form-7 id="4941" title="General contact form"]
close

Sign up for our newsletter

I would like to receive updates and related news from Kemp Little *

Please select below any publications that you would like to receive:

Newsletters

close

Register for future event information

[contact-form-7 id="4943" title="Subscribe to future events"]
close
close
Generic filters
Exact matches only

Can't remember their name? View everyone

  • Home
  • Our people
  • Services
    • Business restructuring and reorganisation
    • Commercial technology
    • Consulting
    • Corporate
    • Data protection & privacy
    • Digital content & reputation risk
    • Disputes
    • Employment
    • Financial regulation
    • Immigration
    • Innovation
    • Intellectual property
    • Private equity & venture capital
    • Sourcing
    • Tax
    • Travel
  • Resources
  • Insights
  • Covid 19: Your Business Continuity
  • Events
  • About us
    • Who we are
    • Our social responsibilities
    • Our partnerships
    • Join us
  • Contact us
  • FlightDeck
  • Sign up for our newsletters
  • Follow us
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn