Mark Hubbard
Mark is a barrister with a reputation as a litigator in commercial litigation, contentious trusts, civil fraud, company, insolvency, regulatory cases as well as advisory work in those fields. His practice has a substantial offshore and international element. Mark has particular experience of litigation in the Bahamas, the Isle of Man, Gibraltar, Guernsey, Jersey, Singapore and Switzerland and is praised by clients for his quick grasp of complex cases, and for the quality of his advocacy, advice, and client skills.
5 Contributions by Mark Hubbard
PRACTICE NOTES
Agency disputes in England and Wales: authority, fiduciary duties, secret commissions, powers of attorney, undisclosed principals, proprietary remedies and procedure
This Practice Note offers a concise survey of agency-related disputes and guidance on the practical application of the key legal rules of agency law within dispute resolution. Certain categories of agent are heavily regulated by statute, and disputes about them sit outside the scope of this Practice Note. For disputes concerning commercial agents, within the meaning of the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993, SI 1993/3053, see these Practice Notes:
Commercial agency
Relationship of commercial agent and principal
Termination of commercial agency
For disputes concerning:
company directors (acting as agents of the company)—see Practice Note: Claims against directors—key considerations for dispute resolution practitioners—Directors’ duties
letting and estate agents—see Practice Note: Regulation of letting and estate agents
What is agency?
Agency is a legal relationship in which one person (the principal) grants authority to another (the agent) to act on the principal’s behalf in dealings with a third party. The law of agency blends contractual principles with the law of fiduciary obligations, and the situations in which agency disputes emerge are wide-ranging. Disputes involving agents can be legally complex...
Dispute Resolution
PRACTICE NOTES
Just and equitable winding-up petitions under IA 1986 s 122(1)(g): procedural guide to presentation, validation orders, directions, evidence, costs and court practice (England and Wales)
This Practice Note sets out, in broad terms, the route for petitioning the court to obtain a winding-up order on the just and equitable ground. Depending on the court handling the matter, you may need to observe additional requirements—see the section below: Court specific guidance. For definitions and key expressions used in relation to a just and equitable winding-up petition, see Practice Note: Just and equitable winding-up—what it is and when to use it—Key terms encountered when applying for a winding-up on the just and equitable ground.
Preliminary considerations
The focus here is chiefly on procedure where a just and equitable winding-up petition is issued as a stand-alone claim. As this is comparatively uncommon, variations in approach between, and indeed within, courts may arise, for example when listing a petition for initial directions. A request to wind up a company on the just and equitable ground is sometimes pursued as an alternative claim within a section 994 petition (Alternative Claim), as discussed in Practice Note: Just and equitable winding-up—what it is and when to use it—Unfair prejudice as grounds for just and equitable winding-up...
Dispute Resolution
PRACTICE NOTES
Just and equitable winding-up under IA 1986: minority remedy, standing, grounds (unfair prejudice, deadlock, substratum), three-stage test, remedies and interaction with CA 2006 s 994
This Practice Note examines the statutory route for presenting a winding-up petition on the just and equitable basis under section 122(1)(g) of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986), explaining its nature and when it may safeguard minority shareholders’ interests. It outlines who may petition, which companies can be targeted, and the rationale for ordering a company to be wound up (including unfair prejudice). It also addresses the relevance of the petitioner’s own behaviour (such as delay) and the remedies available. For a guide to terminology used in this Practice Note—see the section below: Key terms encountered when applying for a winding-up on the just and equitable ground. For procedural guidance, see Practice Note: Just and equitable winding-up - the procedure.
What is a just and equitable winding-up petition?
A petition to wind up a company on the just and equitable ground is a statutory remedy provided by IA 1986, ss 122-125. Although the petition seeks a compulsory winding-up order, the claim is brought by a minority shareholder in relation to a solvent company. As with an unfair prejudice claim, the proper active defendant is the majority, rather than the company itself...
Dispute Resolution
PRACTICE NOTES
Section 994 unfair prejudice petitions for UK companies: grounds, standing, illustrative conduct, and section 996 remedies with valuation approaches
This Practice Note explains the nature of an unfair prejudice claim or petition and identifies when it ought to be deployed to safeguard a minority shareholder’s rights. It further outlines illustrations of unfair prejudice and addresses the remedies that are on offer, with particular regard to section 996 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006).
What is an unfair prejudice claim (a section 994 petition)?
An unfair prejudice claim is a statutory remedy for company members, set out in CA 2006, ss 994–999. Such claims proceed by way of petition and are therefore commonly known as section 994 petitions. A section 994 petition is the principal procedural mechanism by which a minority shareholder may obtain relief from the court due to ‘unfairly prejudicial’ behaviour by the majority. A glossary of the technical expressions employed in this Practice Note appears in the main section headed Terminology below...
Dispute Resolution
PRACTICE NOTES
Unfair prejudice petitions under section 994 Companies Act 2006: procedure, funding, delay, interim relief, pleadings, disclosure, valuation and costs (England and Wales)
This Practice Note reviews the principal procedural features of pursuing a section 994 unfair prejudice claim (formerly a section 459 petition), including funding, limitation, a sketch of the process and costs considerations, as well as some general practical points. For an introduction to unfair prejudice petitions and examples of the varied factual situations and legal questions that can arise, see the following Practice Notes:
Unfair prejudice claim—what is it and when to use it
Unfair prejudice claims—illustrative decisions
Unfair prejudice claims—key and illustrative decisions [Archived]
Depending on the court in which your case is brought, you may also need to account for additional provisions—see below.
Funding the litigation
The company’s funds should not be deployed to bankroll litigation under section 994 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) without the unanimous consent of shareholders (Koza Ltd v Koza Altin Isletmeleri at para [63]). Misapplication of corporate assets to finance the defence—for instance by extending loans to the majority for that end—may itself amount to unfair prejudice (Jones v Jones) and can be restrained by injunction (Re Profile Partners at para [53]). Whether...
Dispute Resolution
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
