Grace v Biagioli

The usual remedy for unfair prejudice is an order for the purchase of the petitioner's shares, and the exclusion of a member was not cured by an offer to pay him a dividend.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 1222, [2006] 2 BCLC 70
Court
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Year
2005
Subject
Company Law
Topic
Unfair prejudice and just and equitable winding up

Facts

Mr Grace was one of four shareholders and directors of a company. After a dispute, the other three removed him as a director and decided to pay a dividend to the other shareholders, but not to him, by paying the equivalent of his dividend into a fund to set off against the price of his shares, which they wanted to buy. He petitioned for relief for unfair prejudice.

Legal principle

The Court of Appeal held that Mr Grace had been unfairly prejudiced by the decision not to pay him a dividend, and ordered the other shareholders to buy his shares. Patten J, giving the judgment of the court, said that the usual remedy where a member has been unfairly prejudiced is an order for the purchase of his shares at a fair value, because it ends the relationship between the parties, which has broken down. An offer to buy the shares could be relevant, but the respondents' offer had not been fair in the circumstances. Mr Grace's removal as a director was not itself unfairly prejudicial, because there was no quasi partnership.

Related cases on unfair prejudice and just and equitable winding up

Studying company law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.

Back to all law cases

This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.

Contact Us

Enquire about our bespoke academic solutions