Barrett v Duckett

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Appeal (Civil Division)
Judgment Date1995
Year1995
Date1995

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
65 cases
  • Perak Integrated Network Services Sdn Bhd v Urban Domain Sdn Bhd and Another
    • Malaysia
    • Court of Appeal (Malaysia)
    • Invalid date
  • Peter Hook v Bernard Sumner and Ors (Defendant/Applicant)
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 27 November 2015
    ...by the use of the name that it owns. 126 It is not a case in which an ulterior motive is shown, such as was the case in Barrett v Duckett [1995] 1 BCLC 243, where there was an objective to further a family dispute. Nor is there any collateral advantage being sought in relation to some other......
  • Oisin Fanning v Brendan Murtagh and Others
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 30 July 2008
    ...YUROE BROADBAND LTD DEFENDANTS COMPANIES ACTS 1963 TO 2006 S205 RSC O.19 r28 WALLERSTEINER v MOIR (NO 2) 1975 QB 373 BARRETT v DUCKETT 1995 1 BCLC 243 FOSS v HARBOTTLE 1843 2 HARE 461 MORSE CHARLESWORTH'S COMPANY LAW 17ED 2005 BIALA PTY v MALLINA HOLDINGS LTD 1993 11 ACSR 785 MOYLAN v IRISH......
  • Iesini v Westrip Holdings Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 16 October 2009
    ...was followed by Lawrence Collins J in Konamaneni v Rolls Royce Industrial Power (India) Ltd [2002] 1 WLR 1269. Likewise in Barrett v Duckett [1995] 1 BCLC 243 Peter Gibson LJ said: “The shareholder will be allowed to sue on behalf of the company if he is bringing the action bona fide for th......
  • Get Started for Free
3 books & journal articles