Ebrahimi V Westbourne Galleries Ltd Summary

Ebrahimi v westbourne galleries ltd 1973 ac 360.

Ebrahimi v westbourne galleries ltd summary. The case was decided in the house of lords. Mr ebharimi and mr nazar had carried on business in partnership dealing in persian and other carpets. Case of ebrahimi v westbourne galleries ltd 23 in the case of ebrahimi v westbourne galleries ltd the house of lords considered passing off or a winding up order on just and equitable ground under section 222 f of the companies act 1948 which section carried the statute before the introduction of section 122 of the insolvency act 1986. 2006 irvine v irvine.

122 justice ferguson used ebrahimi to explain that remedies for oppressive conduct are not entirely the construct of corporations law statutes. They decided to incorporate as the business was highly. Unfair prejudice to minority shareholder a company had operated effectively as a partnership between two and then three directors. In 1958 they formed a private company carrying on the same business and were appointed its first directors.

In the case of ebrahimi v westbourne galleries ltd the house of lords considered passing off or a winding up order on just and equitable ground under section 222 f of the companies act 1948 which section carried the statute before the introduction of section 122 of the insolvency act 1986. 1933 gilford motor co ltd v horne. After falling out between the directors mr nazar and his son voted to remove mr ebrahimi as a director and excluded. That was sufficient to bring the matter within s 459 as it was conduct that was prejudicial to x as a shareholder.

Ebrahimi v westbourne galleries ltd 1973 the case of ebrahimi v westbourne galleries revolved around the fall out between two business partners based in london. Facebook twitter reddit linkedin whatsapp. 1972 ebrahimi v westbourne galleries. 1978 daniels v daniels.

Mr ebrahimi and mr nazar were partners. Ebrahimi v westbourne galleries ltd 1973 ac 360 considered. 1956 pavlides v jensen. Lord wilberforce the profits from their business went only to the directors and there were restrictions in place to prevent mr ebrahimi from selling his shares.

They shared equally in management and profits. W s conduct was a departure from the agreement in which the affairs were agreed to be conducted. Ebrahimi v westbourne galleries ltd 1973 ac 360 is a united kingdom company law case on the rights of minority shareholders. They had decided to incorporate their rug business due to its continued success.