Re Mitt Wearables- Part 1 Inconsistent Agreements: The pitfalls and how to avoid them

Re Mitt Wearables- Part 1 Inconsistent Agreements: The pitfalls and how to avoid them

In July 2023, judgment was given in the case of Re Mitt Wearables, an unfair prejudice petition brought under section 994 of the Companies Act 2006. Laytons ETL acted for Koalaa Ltd (the innovative designer and manufacturer of soft sleeve prosthetics), one of the successful respondents to the petition.

Unfair Prejudice Petitions at risk of time-bar

Unfair Prejudice Petitions at risk of time-bar

Unfair prejudice petitions under s.994 Companies Act 2006 are a key way for minority shareholders to pursue claims when their interests have been adversely affected by the conduct of the majority.  However, until very recently, there was considerable doubt as to whether claims brought in this way by minority shareholders could be time-barred under the provisions of the Limitation Act 1980, and, if so, how.  The received wisdom was that they probably couldn’t be.

Laytons successful in defending unfair prejudice petition against prosthesis disrupter

Laytons successful in defending unfair prejudice petition against prosthesis disrupter

Judgment was handed down on 19 July 2023 in Re Mitt Wearables Ltd, in which Laytons acted for the 5th respondent Koalaa Ltd, the disruptive designer of soft sleeve prostheses. Koalaa is now set to revolutionise the market for prostheses and make comfortable, adaptable and affordable prostheses for all kinds of limb differences accessible to all.