The No Reflective Loss Principle in Marex v Sevilleja: One Step Forward, One Step Back

Journal of Business Law, Forthcoming

10 Pages Posted: 6 Jan 2021 Last revised: 31 Mar 2021

Date Written: November 2, 2020

Abstract

In Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd, a seven-member panel of the Supreme Court undertook a root-and-branch re-examination of the no reflective loss principle. While the Supreme Court's unanimous rejection of the unprincipled expansion of the rule to creditors represents a welcome development of the law, it was held by a bare four to three majority that a shareholder is not entitled to pursue a personal claim to recover loss flowing from the diminution in share value and a reduction in distributions which the claimant receives as a shareholder. This note questions the majority's claim that the no reflective loss principle is doctrinally rooted in the rule in Foss v Harbottle, explains why the policy considerations cited in support of the principle do not warrant a bright-line exclusionary rule, and argues that the majority's approach should - in the final analysis - be eschewed in favour of the minority's.

Keywords: Company Law, Reflective Loss, Corporate Insolvency, the Rule in Foss v Harbottle

Suggested Citation

Sin, Ivan, The No Reflective Loss Principle in Marex v Sevilleja: One Step Forward, One Step Back (November 2, 2020). Journal of Business Law, Forthcoming , Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3723114 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3723114

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
346
Abstract Views
913
Rank
132,098
PlumX Metrics