Rayfield v Hands [1960] Ch 1

Facts

  • Mr. Rayfield was a member of Tewkesbury and District Co-operative Society Limited, a small private company.
  • The defendants were the directors of the company and also members.
  • The articles of association contained a rule requiring any member wishing to transfer shares to notify the directors, who were then obligated to purchase those shares at a fair value.
  • Mr. Rayfield wished to enforce this article, compelling the directors to buy his shares.
  • The directors contended that the rule was not directly enforceable by one member against another, but only constituted an agreement between each member and the company.

Issues

  1. Whether the articles of association can impose enforceable obligations between members directly, rather than only between members and the company.
  2. Whether the directors were contractually bound to purchase Mr. Rayfield’s shares as required by the relevant article.

Decision

  • The court held that the article in question created a contract not just between the company and its members but directly between the relevant members, specifically between Mr. Rayfield and the directors.
  • Contextual factors such as the private and closely held nature of the company, limited membership, and clear wording of the article supported the finding of direct obligation between members.
  • The directors were required to purchase Mr. Rayfield’s shares in accordance with the article.

Legal Principles

  • Section 20 of the Companies Act 1948 (now section 33 of the Companies Act 2006) establishes that articles of association form a statutory contract binding the company and its members, and potentially among members inter se.
  • The articles of a company may, in some circumstances, be enforceable directly between members if the text and company context suggest such an intention.
  • Careful drafting of articles is essential, particularly in small private companies, to ensure clarity as to whom specific obligations attach.
  • The enforceability of direct member obligations is more likely in closely held companies with a stable and limited membership.
  • Later cases have regarded the facts of Rayfield v Hands as somewhat exceptional and cautioned about direct enforceability in larger or less close-knit companies.

Conclusion

Rayfield v Hands confirms that, in certain circumstances, a company’s articles of association can be directly enforceable between members and not just between company and member. The specific context of a private, closely held company and precise article wording were decisive. This case remains a key authority on the contractual effect of articles of association regarding enforceability among members themselves.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal