Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Lawrence Ewan McGaughey & Anor v Universities Superannuation Scheme Limited & Ors

[2023] EWCA Civ 873
Pension members sued their pension fund's directors, claiming mismanagement. The court said they couldn't sue on behalf of the fund because the fund itself wasn't harmed, and they weren't directly harmed in the same way. The members needed to sue the fund directly.

Key Facts

  • Members of the Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) appealed a High Court decision dismissing their common law derivative claim against USS's directors.
  • The claimants, Dr McGaughey and Prof. Davies, sought permission to continue proceedings on behalf of the trustee company (USSL) against current and former directors for breach of directors' duties.
  • USSL is a company limited by guarantee, its directors are its members, and its sole purpose is to act as trustee of the USS.
  • The claims included allegations of improper valuation, discrimination, excessive costs, and inadequate fossil fuel divestment plans.
  • The High Court dismissed the application, finding the claims unsuitable for a derivative action and lacking sufficient standing.

Legal Principles

Rule in Foss v Harbottle: A corporation is the proper plaintiff for wrongs done to it, unless exceptions apply (e.g., fraud on the minority where wrongdoers control the company).

Foss v Harbottle (1843) 2 Hare 461; Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd (No 2) [1982] Ch 204

Derivative Claim Requirements: Sufficient interest/standing; prima facie case of wrongdoing; prima facie case on merits; appropriateness of pursuing the claim.

Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd (No 2) [1982] Ch 204; Boston Trust Co Ltd v Szerelmy Ltd [2021] EWCA 1176

Standing in Derivative Actions: The claimant must demonstrate both that the company suffered a loss and that this loss is reflective of their own loss.

Waddington Ltd v Chan Chun Hoo Thomas [2009] 2 BCLC 82

Fraud on the Minority: A derivative claimant must establish a prima facie case that the defendants committed a deliberate or dishonest breach of duty or improperly benefited themselves at the company's expense.

Harris v Microfusion 2003-2 LLP [2017] 1 BCLC 305

Directors' Duties under Companies Act 2006: To act within powers (s.171); to promote the success of the company (s.172); to exercise independent judgment (s.173); to avoid conflicts of interest (s.175).

Companies Act 2006, sections 171, 172, 173, 175

Beneficiary Derivative Claims: Beneficiaries can sue on behalf of a trust if exceptional circumstances exist and the cause of action is trust property.

Roberts v Gill [2011] 1 AC 240

Outcomes

Appeal dismissed.

The claims were not suitable for a common law derivative action because USSL (the trustee company) did not suffer a loss reflective of the claimants' loss. The claimants lacked standing, and there was no prima facie case of equitable fraud or improper benefit to the directors.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.