{"title":"劳埃德案的判决:对实践有启发,但对法律没有启发","authors":"Edward Walker-Arnott","doi":"10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Lloyds case concerned the 2009 acquisition of HBOS. Shareholders sued 5 directors for losses sustained by them. It was the first case in the UK arising out of the financial crisis of 2008/2009 which went to full trial, with cross- examination of defendant directors, advisers and expert witnesses. It was also the first minority shareholder group litigation case brought against the directors of a listed company pursued through trial to judgment. The 280 page judgment provides an insight into the processes of listed company takeovers. It might have provided illumination of directors’ duties and of the reflective loss principle, which denies shareholders recovery where the company has a claim on the same facts. It did not: and the case gives attention to two reported cases which have long since lost authority.","PeriodicalId":44517,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","volume":"20 1","pages":"579 - 597"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Lloyds case judgment: illuminating on practice but not on law\",\"authors\":\"Edward Walker-Arnott\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Lloyds case concerned the 2009 acquisition of HBOS. Shareholders sued 5 directors for losses sustained by them. It was the first case in the UK arising out of the financial crisis of 2008/2009 which went to full trial, with cross- examination of defendant directors, advisers and expert witnesses. It was also the first minority shareholder group litigation case brought against the directors of a listed company pursued through trial to judgment. The 280 page judgment provides an insight into the processes of listed company takeovers. It might have provided illumination of directors’ duties and of the reflective loss principle, which denies shareholders recovery where the company has a claim on the same facts. It did not: and the case gives attention to two reported cases which have long since lost authority.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Corporate Law Studies\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"579 - 597\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Corporate Law Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Corporate Law Studies","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2020.1754740","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Lloyds case judgment: illuminating on practice but not on law
ABSTRACT The Lloyds case concerned the 2009 acquisition of HBOS. Shareholders sued 5 directors for losses sustained by them. It was the first case in the UK arising out of the financial crisis of 2008/2009 which went to full trial, with cross- examination of defendant directors, advisers and expert witnesses. It was also the first minority shareholder group litigation case brought against the directors of a listed company pursued through trial to judgment. The 280 page judgment provides an insight into the processes of listed company takeovers. It might have provided illumination of directors’ duties and of the reflective loss principle, which denies shareholders recovery where the company has a claim on the same facts. It did not: and the case gives attention to two reported cases which have long since lost authority.