Esheria Jersey Case Law
Sign in
Jersey Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Jersey Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Jersey case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Jersey decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Company law [2021] JRC 025

Financial Technology Ventures II (Q) LP and Ors v ETFS Capital Limited and Tuckwell 26-Jan-2021

Financial Technology Ventures II (Q) LP and Ors v ETFS Capital Limited and Tuckwell 26-Jan-2021 [2021] JRC 025 (26 January 2021)

Minority shareholders sought fair-value relief or winding up after ETFS Capital’s major sales. The Royal Court found no unfair prejudice and dismissed the claims.

  • Unfair prejudice
  • Just and equitable winding up
  • Director duties
  • Shareholder remedies
  • Unfair-prejudice
  • Just-and-equitable-winding-up
Read case analysis
Company law [2014] JRC 255

Kilbey -v- Grafters Ltd and Ors

Kilbey -v- Grafters Ltd and Ors [2014] JRC 255 (22 December 2014)

The Royal Court of Jersey found Grafters was a quasi-partnership and ordered a buy-out of Mr Kilbey’s shares at fair value, but dismissed the data counterclaim.

  • Unfair prejudice
  • Shareholder remedies
  • Quasi-partnership
  • Valuation of shares
  • Director removal
  • Unfair-prejudice
Read case analysis
Company law [2013] JRC 004

EVIC -v- Greater Europe and Green Shoots

EVIC -v- Greater Europe and Green Shoots [2013] JRC 004 (08 January 2013)

The Jersey Royal Court ordered the Fund wound up on just and equitable grounds and appointed independent liquidators, rejecting director-led winding up and other adjournment requests.

  • Winding up of companies
  • Just and equitable winding up
  • Unfair prejudice
  • Liquidator appointment
  • Fund substratum
  • Shareholder remedies
Read case analysis
Company law [2012] JRC 114

Prestigic (Wisley) Nominees Ltd -v- JTC and Others

Prestigic (Wisley) Nominees Ltd -v- JTC and Others [2012] JRC 114 (08 June 2012)

The Royal Court awarded indemnity costs in part after Prestigic pursued an Article 141 application despite overwhelming shareholder opposition and no evidence of unfairness.

  • Costs
  • Indemnity costs
  • Shareholder remedies
  • Majority rule
  • Unfair prejudice
  • Abuse of process
Read case analysis
Company law [2007] JLR 393

Gamlestaden v Baltic Partners Ltd.

Gamlestaden v Baltic Partners Ltd. [2007] JLR 393 (25 April 2007)

The court held that relief for unfair prejudice under Companies (Jersey) Law 1991, article 143(1) is not barred simply because no shareholder benefit exists where the company is insolvent.

  • Minority shareholder protection
  • Unfair prejudice
  • Insolvency
  • Shareholder remedies
  • Company-law
  • Minority-shareholder-protection
Read case analysis
Company law [2005] JCA 015

Gamlestaden v Baltic Partners

Gamlestaden v Baltic Partners [2005] JCA 015 (10 February 2005)

The Court of Appeal held that Article 141 relief was unavailable because any benefit from reversing the impugned transactions would accrue only to Gamlestaden as creditor, not as shareholder.

  • Unfair prejudice
  • Shareholder remedies
  • Directors' fiduciary duties
  • Derivative actions
  • Strike out applications
  • Jurisdiction under companies (jersey) law 1991
Read case analysis
Company law [2004] JRC 131

Gamlestaden Fastigheter Ab v Baltic Partners Limit

Gamlestaden Fastigheter Ab v Baltic Partners Limit [2004] JRC 131 (22 July 2004)

The Jersey Royal Court struck out Gamlestaden’s unfair prejudice representation, holding there was no shareholder value in an insolvent company and that the claim was also barred by delay.

  • Unfair prejudice
  • Shareholder remedies
  • Strike out for want of prosecution
  • Jurisdiction under companies (jersey) law
  • Unfair-prejudice
  • Shareholder-remedies
Read case analysis
Company law [2002] JRC 117

Robertson v Slous

Robertson v Slous [2002] JRC 117 (11 June 2002)

The court found unfair prejudice from excessive management fees extracted from a jointly owned company and ordered the respondent to purchase the petitioner's 50% shareholding.

  • Unfair prejudice
  • Shareholder remedies
  • Valuation of shares
  • Management fees
  • Derivative actions
  • Unfair-prejudice
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Jersey decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.