James Borg‑Olivier v Lord Alfred McCaughran & Ors

James Borg‑Olivier v Lord Alfred McCaughran & Ors

Petitioner is not a shareholder, not entitled to be a shareholder, and lacks standing to present a petition under s.994 Companies Act 2006; no evidence of partnership or quasi-partnership entitling him to relief.

Parties
Petitioner: James Borg Olivier; First Respondent: Lord Alfred McCaughran; Second Respondent: Terence Stockton; Third Respondent: Sullstan Beverages Limited; Fourth Respondent: Bubbles Champagne Bar Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Petition Under Companies Act 2006 S.994 (unfair Prejudice) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Prejudice, Standing of Petitioner, Beneficial Ownership, Quasi Partnership, Shareholder Rights
Company Law Equity Unfair Prejudice Standing of Petitioner Beneficial Ownership Quasi Partnership Shareholder Rights

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Borg Olivier

Petitioner

Lord Alfred McCaughran

First Respondent

Terence Stockton

Second Respondent

Sullstan Beverages Limited

Third Respondent

Bubbles Champagne Bar Limited

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition Under Companies Act 2006 S.994 (unfair Prejudice) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether petitioner is a shareholder or entitled to be a shareholder in Bubbles Champagne Bar Limited
  2. 2 Whether petitioner has standing to present a petition under s.994 Companies Act 2006
  3. 3 Whether there was a partnership or quasi-partnership entitling petitioner to relief

Ratio Decidendi

Petitioner is not a shareholder, not entitled to be a shareholder, and lacks standing to present a petition under s.994 Companies Act 2006; no evidence of partnership or quasi-partnership entitling him to relief.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed