Company in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman
    • Court of Appeal
    • 29 Jul 1988

    He naturally, and rightly, regards the company as his client. It is attached to and forms part of the company's accounts (ss.238 (3) 239). A copy of the company's accounts (including the auditor's report) must be sent to every member (s.240). Any member of the company, even if not entitled to have a copy of the accounts sent to him, is entitled to be furnished with a copy of the company's last accounts on demand and without charge (s.246).

  • Tesco Supermarkets Ltd v Nattrass
    • House of Lords
    • 31 Mar 1971

    A living person has a mind which can have knowledge or intention or be negligent and he has hands to carry out his intentions. A corporation has none of these: it must act through living persons, though not always one or the same person. Then the person who acts is not speaking or acting for the company. He is acting as the company and his mind which directs his acts is the mind of the company. He is not acting as a servant, representative, agent or delegate.

  • Meyer v Scottish Co-operative Wholesale Society
    • House of Lords
    • 24 Jul 1958

    "In my view", he said, "the section warrants the Court in looking at the business realities of a situation and does not confine them to a narrow legalistic view.

  • Ebrahimi v Westbourne Galleries Ltd; Re Westbourne Galleries Ltd
    • House of Lords
    • 03 May 1972

    The words are a recognition of the fact that a limited company is more than a mere judicial entity, with a personality in law of its own: that there is room in company law for recognition of the fact that behind it, or amongst it, there are individuals, with rights, expectations and obligations inter se which are not necessarily submerged in the company structure.

  • Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver
    • House of Lords
    • 20 Feb 1942

    The rule of equity which insists on those who by use of a fiduciary position make a profit, being liable to account for that profit, in no way depends on fraud, or absence of bona fides; or upon such questions or considerations as whether the profit would or should otherwise have gone to the Plaintiff, or whether the profiteer was under a duty to obtain the source of the profit for the Plaintiff, or whether he took a risk, or acted as he did for the benefit of the Plaintiff, or whether the Plaintiff has in fact been damaged or benefited by his action.

  • Amalgamated Investment & Property Company Ltd v Texas Commerce International Bank Ltd
    • Court of Appeal
    • 31 Jul 1981

    When the parties to a transaction proceed on the basis of an underlying assumption—either of fact or of law—whether due to misrepresentation or mistake makes no difference—on which they have conducted the dealings between them—neither of them will be allowed to go back on that assumption when it would be unfair or unjust to allow him to do so. If he does seek to go back on it, the courts will give the other such remedy as the equity of the case demands.

  • Freeman & Lockyer (A Firm)(Plaintiffs) Buckhurst Park Properties (Mangal) Ltd and Shiv Kumar Kapoor (Defendants)
    • Court of Appeal
    • 24 Ene 1964

    In this case the company has known of and acquiesced in the agent professing to act on its behalf, and thereby impliedly representing that he has the company's authority to do so. The company is considered to have made the representation, or causod it to be made, or at any rate to be responsible for it. Accordingly, as against the other contracting Party, who has altered his position in reliance on the representation, the company is estopped from denying the truth of the representation.

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
  • Denmark: Company Draining
    • Núm. 3-1, Febrero 1995
    • Journal of Financial Crime
    • 107-108
    A new phrase has been introduced in Denmark in the field of financial crimes called ‘Company Draining’, and the Public Prosecutor of Commercial Crimes is presently investigating 2,000 cases involvi...
  • Changing Company Law?
    • Núm. 53-3, Mayo 1990
    • The Modern Law Review
  • Company Law–‐Opposing Oppression
    • Núm. 22-3, Mayo 1959
    • The Modern Law Review
  • Baan Company.
    • Núm. 2001, Enero 2001
    • Financial Management (UK)
    • Johnson, Daniel
    • UK office appoints Keith Simpson - Brief Article
    ...Baan Company has appointed Keith Simpson as its new UK business development director. Following its recent acquisition, Baan is now an integrated part of the Software Systems division of Ivenseys. Previously, Simpson held a business development role ......
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results