Skip to main content
CLOSE

Charities

Close

Corporate and Commercial

Close

Employment and Immigration

Close

Fraud and Investigations

Close

Individuals

Close

Litigation

Close

Planning, Infrastructure and Regeneration

Close

Public Law

Close

Real Estate

Close

Restructuring and Insolvency

Close

Energy

Close

Entrepreneurs

Close

Private Wealth

Close

Real Estate

Close

Tech and Innovation

Close

Transport and Infrastructure

Close
Home / News and Insights / News / Lush brings in court to determine value of shares

A conflict between two director-shareholders at Lush led to a court dispute over how to value shares on a sale.

Embroiled in internal disputes, Mr Genie left the company and sought to sell his and his wife’s shares in two companies connected with Lush.

However, within the company’s articles of association, any shareholder wanting to sell their shares had to first offer them to existing shareholders at a price agreed between all parties.

After the parties failed to agree on a valuation of the shares, independent accountants stepped in. However, the parties could not agree on whether it would be best to calculate the price:

  • pro-rata: The calculation is based on their minority shareholding in the overall value of the company which is likely to give rise to a higher valuation; or
  • share premium: The calculation is based on assessing the minority shareholding individually at a discounted rate which is likely to give rise to a lower valuation.

The Court of Appeal examined the companies’ articles, noting that they directed the accountants to value the companies as a whole. The court interpreted the relationship between the two companies as being one of a quasi-partnership, and held that general contractual principles had to be applied to the articles such that the shares should be valued on a pro-rata basis.

This case demonstrates that where the court is required to intervene in shareholder disputes and matters of the company, it will adopt an objective, factual and commercial approach when assessing all the circumstances. When drafting contractual documents, clarity is vital in terms of reflecting all parties’ intentions in the wording.

Related Articles

Our Offices

London
One Bartholomew Close
London
EC1A 7BL

Cambridge
50/60 Station Road
Cambridge
CB1 2JH

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
Grosvenor House, Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

 

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
Grosvenor House, Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

  • Lexcel
  • CYBER ESSENTIALS PLUS

© BDB Pitmans 2024. One Bartholomew Close, London EC1A 7BL - T +44 (0)345 222 9222

Our Services

Charities chevron
Corporate and Commercial chevron
Employment and Immigration chevron
Fraud and Investigations chevron
Individuals chevron
Litigation chevron
Planning, Infrastructure and Regeneration chevron
Public Law chevron
Real Estate chevron
Restructuring and Insolvency chevron

Sectors and Groups

Private Wealth chevron
Real Estate chevron
Transport and Infrastructure chevron