Official Receiver v Stern & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 111 (25 January 2001)

Official Receiver v Stern & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 111 (25 January 2001)

The court held that, on the evidence before the judge, it was not possible to determine whether the foreign-incorporated companies were within the scope of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, and therefore it was correct to refuse leave to act as director and to decline to make a declaration. The burden was on the applicant to establish the necessary jurisdictional connection, which was not met.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 111
Parties
Applicant/respondent: The Official Receiver; Respondent/applicant: William George Stern; Respondent/applicant: Mark Stephen Lawrence Stern
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 January 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Application for Permission to Appeal From Chancery Division (companies Court) Decision
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused with costs.
Legal Topics
Director Disqualification, Jurisdiction Over Foreign Companies, Leave to Act as Director, Interpretation of Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986
Company Law Insolvency Law Director Disqualification Jurisdiction Over Foreign Companies Leave to Act as Director Interpretation of Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Official Receiver

Applicant/respondent

William George Stern

Respondent/applicant

Mark Stephen Lawrence Stern

Respondent/applicant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Application for Permission to Appeal From Chancery Division (companies Court) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the disqualification order under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 applies to foreign-incorporated companies with limited UK connections
  2. 2 Whether the court should grant leave to act as director of such companies under section 17 of the Act
  3. 3 Whether the court should make a declaration as to the applicability of the disqualification order to foreign companies

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, on the evidence before the judge, it was not possible to determine whether the foreign-incorporated companies were within the scope of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, and therefore it was correct to refuse leave to act as director and to decline to make a declaration. The burden was on the applicant to establish the necessary jurisdictional connection, which was not met.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused with costs.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused.
  • Applicant to pay costs.