Horgan v. Murray [1997] IEHC 21; [1997] 3 IR 23 (31st January, 1997)

Horgan v. Murray [1997] IEHC 21; [1997] 3 IR 23 (31st January, 1997)

The articles do not provide for involuntary sale or court-determined compensation for oppression; the petition is not an abuse of process as the Respondents' offer does not address the equitable remedy sought by the Petitioner.

Citation
[1997] 3 IR 23
Parties
Applicant: Petitioner; Respondent: Respondents
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Application to Strike Out or Stay Proceedings / Judgment on Application
Outcome
application to strike out or stay proceedings refused
Legal Topics
Oppression, Shareholder Remedies, Valuation of Shares, Abuse of Process
Company Law Oppression Shareholder Remedies Valuation of Shares Abuse of Process

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Petitioner

Applicant

Respondents

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Strike Out or Stay Proceedings / Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether continuation of proceedings is an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether Articles of Association provide a complete remedy for oppression
  3. 3 Appropriateness of share valuation under company articles

Ratio Decidendi

The articles do not provide for involuntary sale or court-determined compensation for oppression; the petition is not an abuse of process as the Respondents' offer does not address the equitable remedy sought by the Petitioner.

Court Disposition

application to strike out or stay proceedings refused