Back
Get in Touch Menu

Unfair prejudice petitions: Supreme Court confirms no time limit for claims

09 April 2026

The Supreme Court has recently confirmed that unfair prejudice petitions are not subject to statutory limitation periods. Our experts explain what this means.

The Supreme Court’s decision overruled the Court of Appeal’s decision in THG Plc v Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd, and reaffirmed the long-established position that the passage of time does not affect the rights of minority shareholders to seek relief if they believe they have suffered unfair prejudice in respect of their minority shareholding.

Background

In 2019, Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd (“Zedra”), a minority shareholder in THG plc (“THG”), brought a petition alleging unfair prejudice against THG under section 994 of the Companies Act 2006.

During the proceedings, Zedra sought (in 2022) to amend their petition to include an allegation that they had been wrongfully excluded from a bonus share issue in July 2016. THG opposed this amendment, arguing that the bonus share issue occurred more than six years ago and had therefore elapsed due to the statutory period for bringing a claim under the Limitation Act 1980 being six years.

This argument was initially rejected by the High Court, but then later overturned by the Court of Appeal who upheld THG’s appeal and stated that all section 994 petitions:

  1. are subject to a 12-year limitation period; and
  2. that claims seeking monetary relief within such petitions are subject to a six-year limited period.

This meant that, as Zedra were seeking monetary relief in their amended claim, their claim would be time-barred and no relief could be granted. They subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court decision

In making its decision, the Supreme Court had to consider whether, essentially, the statutory limitation period of six years applies to unfair prejudice petitions.

By a majority of 4:1, the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal’s decision and reaffirmed that unfair prejudice petitions are in fact not subject to statutory limitation periods, whether or not monetary relief is sought.

What does this mean for shareholders?

Although the ruling confirms that the limitation period does not apply, it does not mean that time is not a factor in unfair prejudice petitions. The court will still consider any delay when making its decision, particularly if that delay is unreasonable. It remains that minority shareholders should seek advice and, wherever possible, act promptly.

If you have any questions on unfair prejudice petitions or require assistance, please don’t hesitate to get in touch with our director, partnership and shareholder disputes team.

Contact us

Our corporate & commercial team is rated by national legal guides The Legal 500 and Chambers UK. The department’s expert lawyers can help businesses big or small on a variety of challenges that may arise.

Disclaimer: All legal information is correct at the time of publication but please be aware that laws may change over time. This article contains general legal information but should not be relied upon as legal advice. Please seek professional legal advice about your specific situation - contact us; we’d be delighted to help.
Contact
Mekayla Rose-Innes LLB (Hons)
Paralegal
View profile
Chris Wills LLB (Hons)
Partner
View profile
Related services
Share this article
Resources to help

Related articles

Unfair prejudice petitions: Recent shareholder dispute case overturns 40-year precedent

Litigation & dispute resolution

In a recent shareholder dispute, it’s been found that unfair prejudice petitions are subject to statutory limitation periods. This landmark judgment – in Thg Plc v Zedra Trust Company (Jersey)…

Katie Charlton LLB (Hons), MSc
Trainee solicitor

Quit drafting the notice to quit

Litigation & dispute resolution

The Court of Appeal has recently deemed a notice to quit invalid as it was addressed incorrectly, highlighting the importance of accuracy when preparing and serving notices. The court considered…

Bethen Abraham LLB (Hons), LLM
Associate, solicitor

Does a director owe a fiduciary duty to a company’s shareholders?

Director, partnership & shareholder disputes

New case law has thrown directors’ duties into the spotlight once again. Trainee solicitor Helen Howes explains more… Under the Companies Act, a director owes fiduciary duties to the company…

Helen Howes LLM
Senior associate, solicitor
Contact us