Its principle that in allowing a derivative claim to continue the court will have regard to the majority of the minority's views has been codified in Companies Act 2006, section 263(4).

Minority shareholders claimed to recover money paid away contrary to the financial assistance prohibition (now found at section 678 of the Companies Act 2006) and being ultra vires.

He followed Burland v Earle in Lord Davey’s dicta that shareholders cannot have a bigger right to sue than the company with its procedural and substantive limitations.

The case was cited in the Law Commission Shareholder Remedies Report[1] in regards to the amount of court time involved: In the consultation paper we identified two main problems.

We pointed out that it is inaccessible save to lawyers specialising in this field because, to obtain a proper understanding of it, it is necessary to examine numerous reported cases decided over a period of 150 years.