![cover image](https://wikiwandv2-19431.kxcdn.com/_next/image?url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9d/Latex_being_collected_from_a_tapped_rubber_tree.jpg/640px-Latex_being_collected_from_a_tapped_rubber_tree.jpg&w=640&q=50)
Cotman v Brougham
1918 UK company law case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Cotman v Brougham?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Cotman v Brougham [1918] AC 514 is UK company law case concerning the objects clause of a company, and the problems involving the ultra vires doctrine. It held that a clause stipulating the courts should not read long lists of objects as subordinate to one another was valid.
Cotman v Brougham | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Court | House of Lords |
Citation | [1918] AC 514 |
Case opinions | |
Lord Finlay LC, Lord Parker, Lord Wrenbury and Lord Atkinson | |
Keywords | |
Objects clause |
This case is now largely an historical artifact, given that new companies no longer have to register objects under the Companies Act 2006 section 31, and that even if they do the ultra vires doctrine has been abolished against third parties under section 39. It is only relevant in an action against a director for breach of duty under section 171 for failure to observe the limits of their constitutional power.