Johnston, Re An Order for Rectification of the Register of Members of Wind Save Ltd [2004] ScotCS 228 (05 August 2004)

Johnston, Re An Order for Rectification of the Register of Members of Wind Save Ltd [2004] ScotCS 228 (05 August 2004)

The petitioner failed to demonstrate a prima facie case for rectification of the register, as there were substantial factual disputes regarding entitlement to shares and no clear evidence of a binding contract for allotment or transfer. Additionally, the petitioner's inordinate and unexplained delay in seeking interim interdict constituted a strong ground for refusal, as interim interdict is an urgent remedy and delay undermines its purpose.

Citation
[2004] ScotCS 228
Parties
Petitioner: James Brownlee Johnston; Second Respondent: David Hyman Gordon; Respondent: Wind Save Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
05 August 2004
Procedural Posture
Petition for Rectification of Register of Members and Interdict / Interim Interdict Application
Outcome
Interim interdict refused
Legal Topics
Rectification of Register of Members, Share Allotment and Transfer, Interim Interdict, Delay in Seeking Equitable Relief
Company Law Civil Procedure Rectification of Register of Members Share Allotment and Transfer Interim Interdict Delay in Seeking Equitable Relief

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Brownlee Johnston

Petitioner

David Hyman Gordon

Second Respondent

Wind Save Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition for Rectification of Register of Members and Interdict / Interim Interdict Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner has a prima facie case for rectification of the register of members under section 359 of the Companies Act 1985
  2. 2 Whether interim interdict should be granted to prevent disposal or encumbrance of shares pending determination of the petition
  3. 3 Effect of delay on entitlement to interim interdict

Ratio Decidendi

The petitioner failed to demonstrate a prima facie case for rectification of the register, as there were substantial factual disputes regarding entitlement to shares and no clear evidence of a binding contract for allotment or transfer. Additionally, the petitioner's inordinate and unexplained delay in seeking interim interdict constituted a strong ground for refusal, as interim interdict is an urgent remedy and delay undermines its purpose.

Court Disposition

Interim interdict refused

Orders

  • Motion for interim interdict refused