William Moffett

Profile: Company

Experience and Expertise

William has expertise in litigating questions of unfairly prejudicial conduct contrary to section 994 of the Companies Act 2006 (with particular expertise in relation to ‘quasi-partnerships’), pre-emption rights, share transfers and allotment, capital reorganization, construction of articles of association, company meetings and resolutions, members’ voting rights, dividends, the authority, duties and liability of company officers, derivative claims against directors, director disqualification and all aspects of company insolvency.

Recommendations

William is recommended for Traditional Chancery and Real Estate Litigation by Chambers UK and for Commercial Litigation, Professional Negligence and Property Litigation by The Legal 500. Recent directory editorial includes:

• superb attention to detail and a charming manner with clients
• As an advocate he does not get distracted by difficult opponents and focuses on building and presenting
• the best possible case for the client
• head and shoulders above others of his year of call
• popular with clients and really takes the fight to the other side
• produces skeleton arguments that are very clear and show good analysis
• an advocate with a good, relaxed manner, he is firm but not unduly aggressive in court
• a born problem-solver with a loyal and diverse following
• lauded for being thoughtful and thorough
• an excellent lawyer and a strong and clever advocate
• very reliable and always delivers when he says he will
• a truly outstanding trial advocate.

Cases and Work of Note

Examples of recent work in this area include:

• Acting for minority shareholders in a derivative claim against directors for breach of duty in failing to preserve company assets and breach of shareholder agreements following an ill-fated multi-party merger of companies involving accountancy practices and IFAs;
• William acted for the minority shareholder in a tripartite quasi-partnership company, bringing a section 994 petition following a wrongful dilution of his shareholding by the majority shareholder who had acquired the shares of the third ‘quasi-partner’;
• Acting for the successful financial consultancy claimant seeking commission for procuring a seven-figure investment into a software development project from BAE Systems plc, a case which turned upon the authority of particular officers to bind the company into the agreement;
• Acting in a shareholder dispute concerning a family-run aeronautical engineering business which included allegations of exclusion of directors and members from participation in the company. William acted for the successful respondents resisting an interim application to restore a dismissed director in circumstances where a division in the board over a particular trade decision was said to have potentially fatal consequences for its business;
• A claim relating to the enforcement of guarantees concerning the supply of plant to a construction company, including questions of the capacity in which officers of the company had executed the guarantees.