19th Jul 2019 | Articles

In a special two-part series published by New Law Journal earlier this month, Richard Samuel considers the history and likely future of the court’s rulings on shareholder action and reflective loss.

Richard recently acted as junior counsel to the All Party Parliamentary Group on Fair Business Banking, the interveners in Sevilleja v. Marex Financial Ltd. The appeal was heard on 8 May 2019 and judgment is awaited.

Part 1 – In a special two-part NLJ series, Richard Samuel considers the history & likely future of the court’s rulings on shareholder action & reflective loss

  • The Supreme Court is due to review the rule on reflective loss this year in Sevilleja Garcia v Marex Financial Ltd.
  • The orthodox view is that the rule as currently formulated in the House of Lords’ decision Johnson v Gore Wood is an inflexible rule of law..
  • Richard Samuel offers a heterodox view of Johnson as affirming the rule as one of procedure, which should be applied flexibly.

Part 1 is available here.

Part 2 – In a special two-part series Richard Samuel considers Lord Millett’s taste for Marmite: two policy needs & a single response

  • In the second of a two-part series, Richard Samuel explores the reasoning of Lord Millett in Johnson v Gore Wood and Waddington v Thomas which supports the view that the rule on reflective loss is to be applied strictly…
  • … and explores how a third policy requirement behind the rule might be better achieved if the rule is applied flexibly on the facts of each case.

Part 2 is available here.

Many thanks to New Law Journal for making both articles free to view.


For Help or Advice…


Please contact us either by telephone: +44 (0)20 7415 7800 or email: clerks@3harecourt.com

Accreditations

Close
C&R

Menu

Portfolio Builder

Select the legal services that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Portfolio
Title Type CV Email

Remove All

Download


Click here to share this shortlist.
(It will expire after 30 days.)