Prestigic v JTC Management [2012] 2 JLR 1 (14 May 2012)

Prestigic v JTC Management [2012] 2 JLR 1 (14 May 2012)

It is an abuse of process to attempt to circumvent the rule in Foss v. Harbottle by making an application under art. 141(1) for relief in respect of alleged misconduct; such claims must be brought as derivative actions.

Citation
[2012] 2 JLR 1
Parties
Applicant: Prestigic; Respondent: JTC Management
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
14 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Company Law Application / Interlocutory
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Prejudice, Derivative Action, Mismanagement, Foss V. Harbottle Rule
Company Law Unfair Prejudice Derivative Action Mismanagement Foss V. Harbottle Rule

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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prestigic

Applicant

JTC Management

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Company Law Application / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an application under Companies (Jersey) Law 1991, art. 141(1) can be used to seek relief for alleged mismanagement of a company's affairs
  2. 2 Whether such application can circumvent the rule in Foss v. Harbottle

Ratio Decidendi

It is an abuse of process to attempt to circumvent the rule in Foss v. Harbottle by making an application under art. 141(1) for relief in respect of alleged misconduct; such claims must be brought as derivative actions.

Court Disposition

application dismissed