In the recent case of Simply Alarming Security Ltd 7 WLUK 330 the Court refused to order that the Respondent director/shareholder had to purchase the shares of a shareholder/former director (the Petitioner) who alleged that she had been the subject of unfairly prejudicial conduct by the Respondent.
It is a sad reality that the Covid-19 Pandemic is likely to lead to a spike in the number of companies being put into insolvency. This has the potential to leave parties with claims against those companies with a reduced prospect of full recovery, even if their claims are strong. As a result, claimants may look for alternative targets, including ways in which they could sue directors personally.
I have always had a soft spot for the Black Swan jurisdiction: nothing to do with the law, but because it reminds me of my previous study of philosophy and the use of “all swans are white” as an example of falsification theory.
In the recent case of Michael Gott v Rune Hauge and ors  EWHC 1152 (Ch) the court upheld the well-recognised principle of company law that a company’s money should not be used to pay legal costs in disputes between the company’s shareholders.
Treating a director who is a minority shareholder fairly in both their involvement in the management of a company and in any offers to acquire their shares is of paramount importance to defeating an unfair prejudice petition.