Re Elgindata Ltd [1991] BCLC 959

Facts

  • The petitioner was a minority shareholder in Elgindata Ltd and alleged that the company's affairs were conducted in a manner unfairly prejudicial to their interests.
  • Complaints centered on the actions of the majority shareholder-director, including excessive spending, failure to conduct adequate financial reviews, and delays in producing accounts.
  • The company's investments in unprofitable ventures and lack of sufficient financial controls resulted in financial losses.
  • Proper accounting practices were not observed, with absent or delayed financial reports impeding the petitioner's ability to monitor company affairs.
  • The minority shareholder sought relief under section 994 of the Companies Act 1985, which permits court intervention where company conduct is unfairly prejudicial.

Issues

  1. Whether the conduct of the majority shareholder-director constituted unfairly prejudicial management under section 994 of the Companies Act 1985.
  2. Whether financial mismanagement and poor accounting practices satisfy the statutory threshold for unfair prejudice.
  3. The extent to which directors' personal interests conflict with their obligations to act in the best interests of the company.
  4. The adequacy of legal remedies available to protect minority shareholders from exclusion and mismanagement.

Decision

  • The court determined that, while poor management alone does not automatically amount to unfair prejudice, the combination of financial losses, lack of oversight, and harm to minority shareholder interests can cross the legal threshold.
  • Directors are required to act in the best interests of the company rather than for personal advantage.
  • The company’s failure to maintain accurate financial records and provide transparent disclosures contributed to the finding of unfair prejudice.
  • The court established that section 994 relief could address financial mismanagement, breach of director duties, and exclusion of shareholders from participation.
  • Judicial intervention is available in cases of serious mismanagement to prevent majority shareholders from abusing their position.

Legal Principles

  • Section 994 of the Companies Act 1985 allows minority shareholders to seek relief for conduct that is unfairly prejudicial to their interests.
  • Directors must act in the interests of the company and not for personal benefit.
  • Persistent financial mismanagement, combined with inadequate oversight and exclusion of minority shareholders, can amount to unfair prejudice.
  • Courts may intervene to protect minority shareholders where company management disregards proper governance and financial transparency.
  • Reliable record-keeping and financial disclosure are essential duties of directors for corporate accountability and shareholder protection.

Conclusion

Re Elgindata Ltd [1991] BCLC 959 clarified the application of section 994 petitions in cases of financial mismanagement and director misconduct, confirming that sustained disregard for shareholder interests and proper oversight can justify judicial intervention to protect minority rights and ensure sound 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