Peskin v Anderson
| Peskin v Anderson |
|
| Court |
Court of Appeal |
| Citation(s) |
[2000] EWCA Civ 326, [2001] 2 BCLC 1 |
| Case opinions |
| Mummery LJ |
| Keywords |
| Directors' duties |
Peskin v Anderson [2000] EWCA Civ 326 is a UK company law case concerning directors' duties.
Facts
Former members of the Royal Automobile Club Ltd sued the directors for failing to disclose that they had plans to demutualise. They could have got £35,000 but had given up their membership. They claimed that the directors had breached a duty owed to them as shareholders to inform them of the upcoming demutualisation plan.
Judgment
Mummery LJ held that there was no breach of duty. General duties are always owed to the company, and specific duties owed to shareholders can only be generated through voluntary assumptions of responsibilities, in relationship to specific transactions. There was no such assumption of responsibility here.
See also
|
Director duty cases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re Lo-Line Electric Motors Ltd [1988] Ch 477
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
References