Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only.

Pennyfeathers Ltd v Pennyfeathers Property

308 words (1 pages) Case Summary

22nd Dec 2020 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team

Jurisdiction / Tag(s): UK Law

Pennyfeathers Ltd v Pennyfeathers Property Co Ltd [2013] EWHC 3530 (Ch)

Company directors in breach of fiduciary duty and in conflict of interest

Facts

The first claimant was a company set up by the second and third claimant to exploit the opportunity to develop farmland. The second and third defendant were also shareholders in the first claimant. Later, the second and third defendant agreed to buy out the second and third claimant. In anticipation of this, the second and third defendant set up the first defendant company to buy the farm and entered options to buy surrounding land.

Issue

The key issues were whether the obligations of the second and third defendants as directors of the first claimant were superseded by the buy-out agreement and whether the purchase of the farm by them, through the first defendant, was a conflict of interest.

 Held

The court found that the parties were seasoned businessmen. Accordingly, it was unlikely that they intended to be bound by a buy-out contract in the form of a sketchy manuscript note. It was clear that the buy-out agreement was not concluded pending further negotiations with the owner of the farmland. The second and third defendant had acted in conflict of interest and in breach of their fiduciary duties to the first claimant. They had not acquired the informed consent of the second and third claimant in relation to their purchase of the farmland and had acted in bad faith. The establishment by the second and the third defendants of the first defendant company to exploit the development opportunity did not defeat their fiduciary duties owed to the first claimant and the first claimant’s right of action against them.

270 words

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

Related Content

Jurisdictions / Tags

Content relating to: "UK Law"

UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.

Related Articles