Jane Griffiths & Anor v Barbara Wheatley & Ors

Jane Griffiths & Anor v Barbara Wheatley & Ors

The petitioners have no real prospect of success on the petition as their allegations are not founded on the company's constitution, contractual or statutory rights, nor on a legally sustainable equitable expectation. The main allegations are speculative, factually unsupported, or based on isolated historic transactions, and do not amount to unfairly prejudicial conduct under Companies Act 2006 s994. Summary judgment is granted for the main respondents.

Parties
Petitioner: Jane Griffiths; Petitioner: Julie Jones; Respondent: Barbara Wheatley; Respondent: Alison Gomm; Respondent: Beverley Griffiths; Respondent: Tracy Griffiths; Respondent: Samuel Griffiths; Respondent: Daniel Griffiths; Respondent: Wall Lag (Wales) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Unfair Prejudice Petition / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications
Outcome
summary judgment for respondents; petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Prejudice, Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Directors' Duties, Shareholder Rights
Company Law Civil Procedure Unfair Prejudice Summary Judgment Strike Out Directors' Duties 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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jane Griffiths

Petitioner

Julie Jones

Petitioner

Barbara Wheatley

Respondent

Alison Gomm

Respondent

Beverley Griffiths

Respondent

Tracy Griffiths

Respondent

Samuel Griffiths

Respondent

Daniel Griffiths

Respondent

Wall Lag (Wales) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Unfair Prejudice Petition / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conduct of the company and its directors was unfairly prejudicial to the petitioners' interests under Companies Act 2006 s994
  2. 2 Whether the petitioners are entitled to additional information for share valuation purposes
  3. 3 Whether the petitioners have a legal or equitable right to appointment as director

Ratio Decidendi

The petitioners have no real prospect of success on the petition as their allegations are not founded on the company's constitution, contractual or statutory rights, nor on a legally sustainable equitable expectation. The main allegations are speculative, factually unsupported, or based on isolated historic transactions, and do not amount to unfairly prejudicial conduct under Companies Act 2006 s994. Summary judgment is granted for the main respondents.

Court Disposition

summary judgment for respondents; petition dismissed

Orders

  • Relief from sanction application allowed
  • Summary judgment entered in favour of Mrs Wheatley and Mrs Gomm