Schofield v Schofield & Ors
There was no objective, unqualified agreement by Lee Neil Schofield to treat the meeting as valid and effective; his participation was conditional and maintained objections, so the Duomatic principle did not apply and the meeting was invalid.
- Parties
- Appellant: Neil David Schofield; Respondent: Lee Neil Schofield; Respondent: Avenue Road Development Limited; Respondent: Nikolas Garth Rimes (Administrator for Avenue Road Development Ltd)
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 25 February 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Director Removal, Shareholder Consent, Duomatic Principle, Meeting Notice Requirements
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Neil David Schofield
Appellant
Lee Neil Schofield
Respondent
Avenue Road Development Limited
Respondent
Nikolas Garth Rimes (Administrator for Avenue Road Development Ltd)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Lee Neil Schofield acquiesced to short notice for the EGM under the Duomatic principle
- 2 Whether the meeting on 2 October 2009 was validly convened for the removal and appointment of directors
Ratio Decidendi
There was no objective, unqualified agreement by Lee Neil Schofield to treat the meeting as valid and effective; his participation was conditional and maintained objections, so the Duomatic principle did not apply and the meeting was invalid.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- No declaration granted.
- No injunction granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment