■ The question is about the significance of the case, and not about the case generally, so don’t waste time setting out case facts in great detail ■ Don’t just look at the concept
1-10 of 10 Results for:
- All: Essential Cases x
- Study & Revision x
- Company x
Did you mean: Essential Cases: Land Law, Essential Cases: Contract Law, Essential Cases: Tort Law ... Essential Cases: Land Law, Essential Cases: Contract Law, Essential Cases: Tort Law, Essential Cases: Equity & Trusts, Essential Cases: EU Law, Essential Cases: Criminal Law, Essential Cases: Public Law, Essential Cases: Contract Law 5e more less
Chapter
7. Minority Shareholder Remedies
Chapter
13. Skills for Success in Coursework Assessments
, as will be the case in most problems. Establish the principles ( O’Neill v Phillips ), consider where Serin’s case fits within these, and bring in relevant cases—remembering here
Chapter
4. Shares and Shareholders
the case then the directors would be in breach of s. 171(b) even if they were acting in good faith in what they felt was best for the company ( CA 2006, s. 172 ), as in cases such
Chapter
5. Directors’ Duties
need to be sparing with case facts to leave enough time to discuss the law and address the question, but this paragraph shows sometimes case facts are essential to support the point being
Chapter
10. Loan Capital
assets in the ordinary course of business, rather than the class of assets, that is the essential characteristic distinguishing a floating charge from a fixed charge. 4 You don’t need
Chapter
11. Corporate Insolvency
years for relatively not very serious cases, 6–10 years for serious cases not meriting the top bracket, and 11–15 years for particularly serious cases. Here Chelsey’s behaviour would put
Chapter
1. Exam Skills for Success in Company Law
explain, and provide evidence for them, and assess and analyse each point. All this is essential to doing well. But don’t let it become too formulaic: PEA should be your slave and not
Chapter
2. Companies and Corporate Personality
it is not, making the link with earlier cases. Although undoubtedly restrictive, this was not new: a restrictive approach is apparent in cases before Prest , as is the emphasis on
Chapter
12. Mixed Topic Questions
failed in Salomon and very few cases have found agency on the facts (eg Smith, Stone & Knight v Birmingham Corpn [1939] 4 All ER 116 ). More recent cases indicate clear evidence of an
Chapter
6. Company Management and Governance
that you know the status of the powers being discussed 2 Very brief case facts show you know about the case and the context in which the point of law has been developed, without taking
