Rule in foss v harbottle, Business Law and Ethics

RULE IN FOSS v HARBOTTLE:

 What has come to be recognized in company law as "the rule in Foss v Harbottle" is the decision of Vice-Chancellor Wigram in the case of Foss v Harbottle in which the facts, briefly, were as follows.

The plaintiffs, Foss and Turton, were shareholders in a company called The Victoria Park Co. which was formed by statute to buy land for use as a pleasure park. The defendants were the company's five directors and others.  The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants had defrauded the company in various ways, and in particular that certain of the defendants had sold land belonging to them to the company at an exorbitant price. They asked the court to order the defendants to make good the losses to the company and also sought the appointment of a receiver.

It was held that it was incompetent for the plaintiffs to bring such going on, the sole right to do so being that of the company in its corporate character.  The judge stated:

"In law the corporation and the aggregate members of the corporation are not the same thing for purposes like this; and the only question can be whether the facts alleged in this case justify a departure from the rule that, prima facie, would utilize that the corporation should sue in its own name and in its corporate character or in the name of someone whom the law has appointed to be its representative."

The judge eventually concluded that no departure from the rule was justified in the case before him.  The same rule was restated with more clarity by Lord Davey in Burland v Earle when he stated;

"In order to redress a wrong done to the company or to recover moneys or damages alleged to be due to the company, the action there should prima facie be brought by the company itself."

Posted Date: 1/15/2013 2:57:59 AM | Location : United States







Related Discussions:- Rule in foss v harbottle, Assignment Help, Ask Question on Rule in foss v harbottle, Get Answer, Expert's Help, Rule in foss v harbottle Discussions

Write discussion on Rule in foss v harbottle
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions
Registration of Prospectus:  S.43 (1) provides that no prospectus shall be issued by or on behalf of a company unless, on or before the date of its publication, there has been

Classification of Companies: Section 389 of the Companies Act provides that "no company there association or may partnership consisting of more than twenty persons shall be fo

Intellectual property refers to creations of the mind like inventions, artistic and literary works, designs, and more used for profit. There are two categories of intellectual prop

Duties of an Advocate First is, Duty to the Court Whether as an officer of court an advocate is bound to assist in administration of the justice.  Thus he must adv

Civil Law: Further civil law is affected with violations of private rights in their corporate or individual capacity egg breach of contract, negligence, defamation, nuisance,

Rules of Delivery of Goods - Sales of Good So the rule regarding with delivery are like; (a)  The goods should be in a deliverable state and one is (b) Otherwise unless l

State Preamble of the United Nations Charter 'We the Peoples of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war...and to reaffirm faith in fu

What is meaning of Relative Price Effects This final linkage occurs when there is free exchange rate between countries, which means the exchange rate is allowed to appreciate o

Ex-Ship Contracts - Import and Export Trade Therefore whether goods are sold ex ship, such the duties of the seller are-like; (i) To deliver the goods to the buyer from suc

Advantages of Stare Decisis - Aptitude for growth However process of 'distinguishing' cases facilitates the growth of detailed legal principles to deal by different factua