Sidebottom v Kershaw [1920] 1 Ch 154
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 07:05:09 UTC
Company altered its articles by adding provision allowing directors the power to buy out, at a fair price, any shareholder who competed with the business of the company.
A minority shareholder, who carried out a competing business, challenged alteration.
Held
-
Is entirely for benefit of company that members who compete with company be bought out
I.e. if they are members, more likely that they will get benefit of information which will help them compete with company.
Thus alteration is valid.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
Brown v British Abrasive Wheel Co
Company needed urgent capital. Shareholders, holding 98% of shares, were willing to put money up on condition that they could buy out remaining 2% of shareholders. Majority proposed special resolutio...
Dafen Tinplate Co v Llanelly Steel Co
Resolution inserted new article empowering majority to buy out “any shareholder as they thought proper” . Article was invalid. This because it was self-evidently wider than could be necessary in inte...
Howard Smith v Ampol Petroleum
Company was subject to rival takeover bids from two of its shareholders. One bidder had 55% of shares, but was clear that the other offer was better for company. Thus directors of company allotted $1...
Gambotto v WCP
Was proposed alteration to articles giving company power to buy out shareholders compulsorily. Claimant, a minority member, sued on grounds that alteration was invalid. In expropriation cases, test f...
Greenhalgh v Arderne Cinemas Ltd
Under company law, within a private company, where the articles contain provisions that restrict the transfer of shares to members, a majority resolution may be passed authorizing the sale of shares...
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.