Application for an administration order in respect of FM Front Door Ltd. The application followed FM’s failure to make payments under a loan from the Dunfermline Building Society obtained to assist with the purchase of flats at the Skyline development on Finniestoun Street in Glasgow. The loan was secured by a floating charge and standard securities over each of the flats. FM’s parent company FM Developments also granted a guarantee for the loan. Clause 13 of the loan agre ...
|
The pursuer was a company incorporated in Rwanda. In March 2009, it entered into a Concession Agreement with the Government of Rwanda whereby it was licensed to build, own and operate a power plant and gas production plant at Lake Kivu, on the border between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The defender, a company incorporated in Scotland, had earlier entered into similar agreements with the Government of Rwanda. The defender was involved in arbitration proceedings, contending ...
|
The pursuer and defenders previously practised as partners in the firm of Pattison & Sim, Solicitors. This dispute had arisen from an agreement which the parties entered into in October 2005, when the pursuer proposed to retire from the partnership. The agreement provided for payment to the pursuer of sums (in instalments) to purchase his capital and interest in the firm. The defenders initially paid the instalments but on becoming aware of a potential liability of the firm to the Scottish S ...
|
Complicated case in which the Liquidator of the Letham Grange Development Company sought reduction of a security over the Letham Grange resort near Arbroath. The case involves a number of companies all controlled by a Mr Liu and his family. The grounds for challenge The Liquidator argued that the holder of the security (Foxworth) had (1) not acquired the rights under the security in good faith and for value and (2) the security was void as it was not in the correct form. Good fait ...
|
In this action, the pursuers and respondents sought decree for payment to them of £15,000 with interest, against the defender and appellant. The action was founded on the basis of a Personal Guarantee granted by the appellant to the respondent in respect of all sums owed from time to time to the respondents by the company, Fairclaim Limited, executed in June 2003. The appellant was a former direction of Fairclaim. The appellant submitted that he was unaware of the company’s previous ...
|
At first instance, the Lord Ordinary had required the creditors in this petition to produce documentation, for the purposes of conducting a proof. This documentation had previously been submitted to the petitioner as part of a valuation exercise, in connection with scheme sanctioning proceedings under sections 896 and 899 of the Companies Act 2006. The creditors reclaimed against the order of the Lord Ordinary, arguing that they were entitled to object to the production of such documentation and ...
|
The pursuers, the defender and others were formerly shareholders in a company called LAGTA Limited. In 2007 the defender, who was the managing director of the company, negotiated the sale of the shares in the company on behalf of the shareholders. In this action, the pursuers sought an accounting from the defender on the ground that he obtained an undisclosed benefit in breach of his fiduciary or quasi-fiduciary obligations to them in the context of those negotiations. In this debate on relevan ...
|
Farstad Supply A/S owned a vessel called the “Far Service”. On 4 February 1994, Aberdeen Service Company (North Sea) Ltd (“Asco UK Ltd”) chartered the Far Service from Farstad. Asco UK Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of ASCO plc, a major oil and gas logistics company registered in Scotland. They wished to use the Far Service to supply and service offshore installations.Enviroco Ltd cleans ships on an industrial scale among other things and is also registered in Scotland. Until 1999 it too, like ...
|
This petition related to the conduct of the affairs of the respondent and was first raised in November 1994; the petitioner was a shareholder in the first respondent, holding 24 out of 100 issued shares in the company. The petitioner sought an order under section 459 of the Companies Act 1985 for an order requiring the company and certain of its shareholders to purchase the shares in the company held by the petitioner at a price that represented, at the valuation date, that proportion of the val ...
|
In this action, the pursuer sought to enforce rights over property obtained by the first defender allegedly in breach of fiduciary duties owed by him to the pursuer as one of its directors. Before the Lord Ordinary at first instance, the defenders had challenged the relevancy of the pursuer’s averments and sought its dismissal on the grounds that a ratification of the raising of the action at the pursuer’s meeting of directors was ineffective, because two of the directors had persona ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |