Weatherley v Weatherley & Ors

Weatherley v Weatherley & Ors

The court found that all relevant shareholders gave informed assent to the property transfer, there was no fundamental understanding guaranteeing employment, dividends were paid appropriately, petitioner was registered as shareholder, and stock was not understated. No ongoing risk of unfair prejudice was established. The petitioner's own conduct led to breakdown of trust and confidence, making her position untenable. Relief was not warranted.

Parties
Petitioner: Fiona Yasmin Weatherley; Respondent: Kenneth Edward Weatherley; Respondent: June Weatherley; Respondent: Debra Roscoe; Respondent: Weatherley Fencing Contractors Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Petition for Unfair Prejudice Under Companies Act / Final Judgment
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Prejudice, Shareholder Rights, Directors' Duties, Family Business, Corporate Governance, Minority Shareholder Protection
Company Law Equity Unfair Prejudice Shareholder Rights Directors' Duties Family Business Corporate Governance Minority Shareholder Protection

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 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fiona Yasmin Weatherley

Petitioner

Kenneth Edward Weatherley

Respondent

June Weatherley

Respondent

Debra Roscoe

Respondent

Weatherley Fencing Contractors Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition for Unfair Prejudice Under Companies Act / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the transfer of company property to a director at undervalue was unfairly prejudicial
  2. 2 Whether exclusion of petitioner and her son from company employment breached a fundamental understanding
  3. 3 Whether non-payment of dividends and changes to articles were unfairly prejudicial

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that all relevant shareholders gave informed assent to the property transfer, there was no fundamental understanding guaranteeing employment, dividends were paid appropriately, petitioner was registered as shareholder, and stock was not understated. No ongoing risk of unfair prejudice was established. The petitioner's own conduct led to breakdown of trust and confidence, making her position untenable. Relief was not warranted.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed