Palmer v P1 Pit Stop — courts can create & rectify the register of members

If your company has never kept a register of members, the court can still decide who owns the shares — and order you to create one.
Talk to us: 0333 004 4488 | hello@brabners.com | Contact us
AuthorsJack BeckRachel Brassey
4 min read

If your company has never kept a register of members, the court can still decide who owns the shares — and order you to create one.
In Palmer v P1 Pit Stop Limited [2026] EWHC 1924 (Ch) (Palmer v P1 Pit Stop), the High Court confirmed that it could direct the creation and retrospective completion of statutory registers where none existed.
Here, Jack Beck and Rachel Brassey from our corporate team explore what happened, what the Court decided and the practical steps that companies should take to stay compliant and deal-ready.
A dispute arose over the ownership of shares in a company. The company had never kept a register of members, despite the requirement to do so under the Companies Act 2006. The Claimants sought a declaration as to the correct contents of the register of members and asked the Court to order the creation of statutory registers reflecting that position.
Under section 125 of the Companies Act 2006, the Court has the power to rectify a company's register of members. The key issue was whether that power extended beyond correcting an existing register to determining share ownership where no register had ever been maintained and directing that statutory registers be created accordingly.
The High Court confirmed that its statutory power to rectify a register of members extends to circumstances in which no register was ever maintained and ordered the company to create registers reflecting the correct ownership position. It also confirmed that those entries could take effect retrospectively, so that shareholders were treated as having been entered in the register on the dates when they should originally have been recorded.
The case serves a stark reminder that statutory registers aren’t merely administrative records. They form part of a company's constitutional framework and are often the primary evidence of legal ownership of shares.
As this case shows, when registers are missing, incomplete or inaccurate, disputes can arise over:
These issues often come to light during funding rounds, investments and business sales, when buyers and investors scrutinise a company's corporate records as part of their due diligence process.
The decision in Palmer v P1 Pit Stop is a call to action for companies to audit their internal records and governance to ensure that they’re complete and up to date.
In particular, businesses should check that:
Corporate record-keeping issues frequently emerge during investment and sale processes. During due diligence exercises, missing or inaccurate statutory records are often identified only when a transaction is already underway. Something as simple as an incomplete register of members can delay a transaction, increase professional costs and — in some cases — jeopardise a deal entirely.
Maintaining accurate statutory registers is a key part of being ‘exit ready’. Through our Journey to Exit programme, we help businesses to identify and resolve governance issues before they become obstacles to growth, investment or a future sale. By addressing these issues early, business owners can reduce risk, minimise transaction delays and place themselves in the strongest position for future opportunities.
Need help reviewing your statutory books? Our award-winning corporate team can carry out a corporate health check, identify any gaps in your records and help to ensure that your business is ready for its next stage of growth.
Start your journey to exit today — talk to us by giving us a call on 0333 004 4488, sending us an email at hello@brabners.com or completing our contact form.


Loading form...

If your company has never kept a register of members, the court can still decide who owns the shares — and order you to create one.

We explain what pre-sale due diligence is and break down why more shareholders are undertaking it before going to market.

We share five practical tips for those preparing to sell their healthcare business, focusing on preparation, timing and working with the right advisers.

We’ve delivered another strong year of dealmaking, achieving 16% growth and advising on more than £900m in transactions.

We break down the recurring challenges that GCs face across transactions and projects and outline how we can help them with practical, flexible support.

We explore the succession options available to law firm partners — from partner buy‑outs to private equity sales, acquisitions and EOTs.

We explore the Chancellor’s decision to change the capital gains tax (CGT) relief available for disposals to Employee Ownership Trusts (EOTs).

We explore why a law firm might favour an employee ownership model and outline the common themes behind their choice.

We explore employee ownership as a route to exit and detail the associated benefits and challenges.

Selling a business can be a daunting prospect. Yet while there are a variety of ways in which a deal can be structured, they all fall into a few broad categories.

Exiting your business (showing your hand) is usually just one of many options that an entrepreneur should consider...

Our corporate lawyers explore management buyouts (MBOs) as a route to exit and weigh up the associated benefits and drawbacks.

When MPE Group Limited's shareholders decided to exit the business to a US group, we provided commercial and tailored legal advice on all parts of the transaction.