Re Coroin Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 781

Facts

  • The case concerned Coroin Ltd, a company involved in a luxury resort project in the Caribbean.
  • There were disputes among shareholders regarding funding and management of the project.
  • The majority shareholders issued new shares, substantially reducing the minority shareholders’ stake in the company.
  • The majority claimed the share allotment was necessary to fund the project, whereas the minority contended it was designed to diminish their involvement and control.
  • The dispute centered on whether the share allotment amounted to unfair treatment of the minority shareholders under section 994 of the Companies Act 2006.

Issues

  1. Whether the share allotment by the majority shareholders constituted unfair prejudice towards the minority shareholders under section 994 of the Companies Act 2006.
  2. Whether the primary purpose of the share allotment was to raise capital or to weaken the voting power and control of the minority shareholders.
  3. Whether proper processes and honest intentions were followed in the issuance of new shares.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal found that the share allotment in question amounted to unfair treatment of the minority shareholders.
  • The court determined that the main purpose of the share issue was not genuinely to raise funds but to reduce the minority’s voting power and control.
  • The court considered the context, including historical disputes and the purported reasons for the allotment, concluding the majority acted improperly.
  • The ruling reaffirmed the requirement for directors and majority shareholders to act honestly and for valid company purposes when issuing shares.

Legal Principles

  • Courts must scrutinize the context and motive behind share allotments, not just stated reasons such as capital raising.
  • An act that superficially appears lawful may still be unfair if the true intention is to prejudice minority shareholders.
  • Compliance with correct procedures is essential; procedural irregularities may suggest improper motive but are not solely determinative.
  • Section 994 of the Companies Act 2006 provides minority shareholders with remedies against unfair prejudice.
  • Directors must act honestly and consider the interests of all shareholders when making decisions on share allotment.

Conclusion

Re Coroin Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 781 reinforced that share allotments must be conducted for bona fide company purposes, with transparency and fair process, and not as tools for oppression. The decision affirms the importance of minority shareholder protections and proper conduct in corporate governance.

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