‘The nightmare scenario. Your co-directors leave and set up a competing business. They lure employees to join them and use your systems and processes to create a copycat product or service. What can you do?’
Technology Law Update, 27th May 2015
Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk
Jetivia SA and another (Appellants) v Bilta (UK) Limited and others (Respondents) [2015] UKSC 23 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 22nd April 2015
‘The defence of ex turpi causa non oritur actio is not available to company directors in a claim by the company for conspiracy to defraud the company because the directors’ conduct cannot be attributed to the company in the context of its claim for a breach of the directors’ duties. Section 213 of the Insolvency Act 1986 has extra territorial effect and can be invoked against the directors.’
WLR Daily, 22nd April 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Can a company which has been fined for anticompetitive conduct seek to recover the fine from the directors and employees responsible by suing them for damages?’
Competition Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 29th April 2015
Source: www.competitionbulletin.com
In re Melodious Corpn; Pui-Kwan v Kam-Ho and others [2015] EWHC 621 (Ch); [2015] WLR (D) 162
‘Rule 7.55 of the Insolvency Rules 1986 had no application in circumstances where a meeting of the board of directors of the company purporting to place the company into administration out of court pursuant to paragraph 22(2) of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 was inquorate and accordingly the resolution to appoint an administrator was invalid.’
WLR Daily, 10th March 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘A non-executive director who failed to declare a conflict of interest has lost her appeal against the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which had fined her £154,800 and banned her from holding a regulated financial services role.’
OUT-LAW.com, 13th January 2015
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Hot on the heels of the SFO’s first conviction under the Bribery Act 2010, discussed in George’s post, and just as some of us were disappearing for a Christmas break, the SFO announced its first conviction of a company for bribery of foreign public officials after a contested trial. (Regular SFO-watchers will recall that in Mabey & Johnson (2009) and Innospec (2010), both companies pleaded guilty by agreement to offences involving bribery of foreign public officials.) This prosecution was not in fact under the much-trumpeted Bribery Act 2010, but under s1 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906.’
RPC Financial Services Blog, 7th January 2015
Source: www.rpc.co.uk
‘The Football League finally got their man. But is it too late? Will Massimo Cellino and Leeds United yet sail off into the clear blue sea?’
Sports Law Bulletin from Blackstone Chambers, 3rd December 2014
Source: www.sportslawbulletin.org
Cartiera dell’Adda SpA v CEM Ambiente SpA (Case C-42/13) EU:C:2014:2345; [2014] WLR (D) 468
‘Article 45 of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/18/EC of 31 March 2004 on the co-ordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1177/2009 of 30 November 2009), read in conjunction with article 2 of the Directive, and the principle of equal treatment and the obligation of transparency did not preclude the exclusion of an economic operator from a procurement procedure on the ground that the operator had failed to comply with the requirement laid down in the contract documentation to annex to his bid, on pain of exclusion, a statement that the person designated as the operator’s technical director had not been the subject of criminal proceedings or a conviction, even where, at a date after the expiry of the deadline for submitting bids, such a statement had been provided to the contracting authority or it was shown that the person in question was identified as the technical director in error.’
WLR Daily, 6th November 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The former chief executive, finance director and marketing director at a UK insurance provider have been served with fines by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and banned from taking senior positions at other financial services companies in the future.’
OUT-LAW.com, 10th November 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The attorney general has revealed that the government is considering changing the evidential basis for prosecuting white collar crime.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 20th October 2014
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Tesco says it has been notified by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) that it is under investigation following its admission last week that it overstated its half-year profit guidance by £250m.’
BBC News, 1st October 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘John Mulholland who has an international reputation and is published widely in academic journals, billed the NHS £1.1 million for work that was never done.’
Daily Telegraph, 3rd September 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The test of whether there was a breach of the duty under section 175 of the Companies Act 2006 was objective, and did not depend on whether the director was aware that what he was doing was a breach of his duty. It was no defence to a claim for breach of this duty that the director had acted in good faith. Nor was it a defence that the director had acted reasonably, but wrongly, had thought that he had been entitled to do what he had done.’
WLR Daily, 1st August 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Smithton Ltd v Naggar; [2014] EWCA Civ 939; [2014] WLR (D) 306
‘The Court of Appeal set out points of general practical importance in determining whether a person was a de facto director.’
WLR Dail, 10th July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘CPR r 81.4(3), which gave the court power to order that a company director or officer be imprisoned for a company’s contempt, applied to a director who was outside the jurisdiction.’
WLR Daily, 23rd May 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The Government is to introduce a law imposing tougher penalties on “rogue and reckless” company directors that could see them paying compensation to victims.’
The Independent, 19th April 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘CPR r 81.4(3), which gave the court power to order that a company director or officer be imprisoned for a company’s contempt, applied to a director who was outside the jurisdiction.’
WLR Daily, 20th December 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Four men have been jailed for making more than £1.3m worth of counterfeit £10 notes.’
BBC News, 13th January 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Regina v Wilson (Michael) [2013] EWCA Crim 1780 ; [2013] WLR (D) 404
“Article 32(8) of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 did not create a discrete offence, but an indictment containing a charge which referred only to article 32(8), and not to the other article in combination with which it created an offence, was not a nullity and a conviction might, despite the material irregularity, be considered safe.”
WLR Daily, 23rd October 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025