Are double derivative actions preserved?
By Adam Dowdney
In UPMS v Fort Gilkicker, the High Court had to decide whether common law recognises the concept of double derivative actions and, if so, whether they survived the coming into force of the Companies Act 2006.
The single derivative action is a longstanding principle of English company law. It was established by common law as an exception to the harsh rule in Foss v Harbottle that only the company itself had locus standi to bring an action in the company’s name. That meant that no action could be taken against directors where those directors controlled the company or could veto action on the company’s part against themselves.
Common law also evolved the derivative action principle to confer a right of action upon persons with the closest sufficient interest, allowing them to bring a claim on the company’s behalf — the so-called ‘double derivative’ action…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Shoosmiths briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from Shoosmiths
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Shoosmiths
The importance of companies being able to freely advertise their fees or discounts has again been highlighted by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA).
One way of seeking to manage cashflow in the construction supply chain is to use the right of set-off, and including a contractual set-off clause can provide significant benefits.
Analysis from The Lawyer
Compliance and corporate governance codes for large financial institutions will undoubtedly include provisions to regulate high pay in the future
There’s more to the ABS model than attracting the man in the street and procuring external investment. Partners at the big corporate firms, take note…