Corporate disputes

Introduction to corporate disputes

There is vast potential for disputes to arise within a corporate context. Included within this subtopic is practical guidance and/or an overview of some of the issues pertinent to claims involving:

  1. directors

  2. agents

  3. shareholders, in particular, guidance is provided on:

    1. unfair prejudice claims

    2. petitions to wind up on the just and equitable ground, and

    3. derivative claims

In terms of relief for minority shareholders, bringing an unfair prejudice petition is the primary route available, but each of the three shareholder actions listed above can be in effect deployed as a means to achieve proper value for a member in respect of their shares.

The rule against reflective loss and the following common corporate dispute scenarios are also addressed in this subtopic:

  1. joint venture disputes

  2. breach of warranty claims

Directors

Tasked with managing the day-to-day business, a large number of corporate disputes will involve company directors.

Typically directors of companies benefit from a limited liability status, where they are able to trade and enter into arrangements on their company’s behalf while being personally

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Dispute Resolution News

Withholding DSAR documents from inspection during data protection proceedings by relying on a Data Protection Act 2018 exemption (Cole v Marlborough College)

Information Law analysis: This claim relates to the scope of production and the application of the exemptions to production of personal data in responding fully to a subject access request. The Claimant, Thomas Cole (Cole), who was a student at the Defendant school, Marlborough College (the College), submitted a data subject access request (DSAR) under Article 15 of the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation, Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (the UK GDPR) after he was removed from the school following his involvement in a physical altercation with another student. In this half-day case management hearing, Mr Justice Nicklin assessed whether the College was entitled to withhold, in whole or part, documents containing Cole’s personal data, rather than providing the material for inspection ahead of a two-day trial on the data protection claim expected to start in mid-2025. The court held that the College was entitled to withhold some documents (containing Cole’s personal data) on the grounds of the exemption in paragraph 16 of Schedule 2, Part 3 to the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018). In short, this exemption provides that a controller is not obliged to disclose information to a data subject where doing so involves disclosing information that relates to another individual who can be identified from that information, whether as the source of information or as the subject of such information. Written by Robyn Bond, associate at Ropes & Gray International LLP.

View Dispute Resolution by content type :

Popular documents