Foss v Harbottle
E628501
Foss v Harbottle is an 1843 English company law case that established the rule that only a company itself, rather than individual shareholders, can sue for wrongs done to the company, subject to limited exceptions.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Foss v Harbottle canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T6919447 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Foss v Harbottle Context triple: [Court of Chancery, notableCase, Foss v Harbottle]
-
A.
Inns of Chancery
The Inns of Chancery were medieval and early modern English legal institutions that served as preparatory training colleges and residences for law students and clerks associated with the Inns of Court in London.
-
B.
Somerset v Stewart
Somerset v Stewart was a landmark 1772 English court case that effectively declared slavery unsupported by English common law, becoming a pivotal moment in the British abolitionist movement.
-
C.
Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge
Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge was an 1837 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited implied corporate rights in public charters and affirmed states’ power to promote the public interest over private monopoly claims.
-
D.
Dartmouth College v. Woodward
Dartmouth College v. Woodward is an 1819 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the protection of corporate charters as contracts under the Constitution, limiting states’ power to alter them.
-
E.
Ruskin v. Whistler libel case
The Ruskin v. Whistler libel case was an 1878 British lawsuit in which American-born artist James McNeill Whistler sued influential critic John Ruskin for defamation over a harsh review of his painting, highlighting tensions between avant-garde art and traditional criticism.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Foss v Harbottle Target entity description: Foss v Harbottle is an 1843 English company law case that established the rule that only a company itself, rather than individual shareholders, can sue for wrongs done to the company, subject to limited exceptions.
-
A.
Inns of Chancery
The Inns of Chancery were medieval and early modern English legal institutions that served as preparatory training colleges and residences for law students and clerks associated with the Inns of Court in London.
-
B.
Somerset v Stewart
Somerset v Stewart was a landmark 1772 English court case that effectively declared slavery unsupported by English common law, becoming a pivotal moment in the British abolitionist movement.
-
C.
Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge
Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge was an 1837 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited implied corporate rights in public charters and affirmed states’ power to promote the public interest over private monopoly claims.
-
D.
Dartmouth College v. Woodward
Dartmouth College v. Woodward is an 1819 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the protection of corporate charters as contracts under the Constitution, limiting states’ power to alter them.
-
E.
Ruskin v. Whistler libel case
The Ruskin v. Whistler libel case was an 1878 British lawsuit in which American-born artist James McNeill Whistler sued influential critic John Ruskin for defamation over a harsh review of his painting, highlighting tensions between avant-garde art and traditional criticism.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
English company law case
ⓘ
leading case ⓘ precedent ⓘ |
| appliesTo |
companies incorporated under statute
ⓘ
companies limited by shares ⓘ |
| concernsEntityType | joint stock company ⓘ |
| concernsIssue |
improper acquisition of company land
ⓘ
misapplication of company property ⓘ |
| establishedRule |
courts will not interfere with internal management of a company at the instance of minority shareholders
ⓘ
individual shareholders generally cannot sue for wrongs done to the company ⓘ only the company can sue for wrongs done to the company ⓘ |
| followedIn | other common law jurisdictions ⓘ |
| formsBasisFor | statutory derivative claim provisions in modern company law ⓘ |
| hasAreaOfLaw |
company law
ⓘ
corporate law ⓘ |
| hasCitation |
(1843) 2 Hare 461
ⓘ
67 ER 189 ⓘ |
| hasCountry | United Kingdom ⓘ |
| hasCourt | Court of Chancery ⓘ |
| hasDecisionYear | 1843 ⓘ |
| hasDefendant |
Harbottle
ⓘ
other directors of the company ⓘ |
| hasDoctrineName | rule in Foss v Harbottle ⓘ |
| hasExceptionType |
acts requiring a special majority not properly obtained
ⓘ
acts ultra vires the company ⓘ derivative action ⓘ fraud on the minority ⓘ invasion of personal rights of shareholders ⓘ where wrongdoers are in control of the company ⓘ |
| hasImpact |
reinforced majority control in corporate decision-making
ⓘ
restricted minority shareholder litigation ⓘ |
| hasJudge | Wigram V-C ⓘ |
| hasJurisdiction | England and Wales ⓘ |
| hasLegalPrinciple |
internal management rule
ⓘ
majority rule principle ⓘ proper plaintiff rule ⓘ |
| hasPlaintiff |
Edward Starkie Turton
ⓘ
Richard Foss ⓘ |
| held |
minority shareholders could not sue in their own names for a wrong done to the company
ⓘ
the company was the proper plaintiff to sue for the alleged wrongs ⓘ |
| influenced | development of derivative actions in common law jurisdictions ⓘ |
| isKeyCaseFor |
corporate personality doctrine
ⓘ
shareholder remedies ⓘ |
| isTaughtIn | company law courses ⓘ |
| relatesToConcept |
majority rule in companies
ⓘ
minority shareholder protection ⓘ separate legal personality of the company ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Foss v Harbottle Description of subject: Foss v Harbottle is an 1843 English company law case that established the rule that only a company itself, rather than individual shareholders, can sue for wrongs done to the company, subject to limited exceptions.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.