Decision

Decision on Schrodinger Capital Ltd

Updated 19 May 2021

Order under the Companies Act 2006

In the matter of application No. 3024

For a change of company name of registration No. 11352909

Decision

The company name SCHRODINGER CAPITAL LTD has been registered since 9 May 2018 under number 11352909.

By an application filed on 3 October 2019, Schroders plc applied for a change of name of this registration under the provisions of section 69(1) of the Companies Act 2006 (the Act).

A copy of this application was sent to the primary respondent’s registered office on 24 October 2019, in accordance with rule 3(2) of the Company Names Adjudicator Rules 2008. The copy of the application was sent by Royal Mail “Signed For” service and also by standard mail. On 24 October 2019, the Tribunal wrote to Harijs Raubiskis, Dmitrii Lapshin and Igor Dubnov to inform them that the applicant had requested that they be joined to the proceedings. The letters sent to Mr Lapshin were returned to the Tribunal marked “RTS”. No comments were received from Messrs. Raubiskis and Dubnov in relation to this request. On 10 January 2020, Messrs. Raubiskis, Lapshin and Dubnov were joined as co-respondents. The letters sent to Messrs. Lapshin and Dubnov were returned to the Tribunal marked “RTS”. On 10 January 2020, the parties were advised that no defence had been received to the application and so the adjudicator may treat the application as not being opposed. The parties were granted a period of 14 days to request a hearing in relation to this matter, if they so wished. No request for a hearing was made.

In official letters dated 23 March 2020, the Tribunal advised the parties that as Messrs. Lapshin and Dubnov resigned as directors of the company on 19 February and 13 March 2020 respectively, they would no longer be joined as co-respondents. The applicant elected not to comment on the approach mentioned. The letter sent to Mr Lapshin was returned to the Tribunal marked RTS”.

The primary respondent did not file a defence within the one month period specified by the adjudicator under rule 3(3). Rule 3(4) states:

The primary respondent, before the end of that period, shall file a counter-statement on the appropriate form, otherwise the adjudicator may treat it as not opposing the application and may make an order under section 73(1).

Under the provisions of this rule, the adjudicator may exercise discretion so as to treat the respondent as opposing the application. In this case I can see no reason to exercise such discretion and, therefore, decline to do so.

As the primary respondent has not responded to the allegations made, it is treated as not opposing the application. Therefore, in accordance with section 73(1) of the Act I make the following order:

(a) SCHRODINGER CAPITAL LTD shall change its name within one month of the date of this order to one that is not an offending name ^{[footnote 1]};

(b) SCHRODINGER CAPITAL LTD and Harijs Raubiskis each shall:

(i) take such steps as are within their power to make, or facilitate the making, of that change;

(ii) not to cause or permit any steps to be taken calculated to result in another company being registered with a name that is an offending name.

In accordance with s.73(3) of the Act, this order may be enforced in the same way as an order of the High Court or, in Scotland, the Court of Session.

In any event, if no such change is made within one month of the date of this order, I will determine a new company name as per section 73(4) of the Act and will give notice of that change under section 73(5) of the Act.

All respondents, including individual co-respondents, have a legal duty under Section 73(1)(b)(ii) of the Companies Act 2006 not to cause or permit any steps to be taken calculated to result in another company being registered with an offending name; this includes the current company. Non-compliance may result in an action being brought for contempt of court and may result in a custodial sentence.

Schroders plc having been successful, is entitled to a contribution towards its costs. I order SCHRODINGER CAPITAL LTD and Harijs Raubiskis, being jointly and severally liable, to pay Schroders plc costs on the following basis:

Fee for application: £400
Statement of case: £400

Total: £800

This sum is to be paid within seven days of the expiry of the appeal period or within seven days of the final determination of this case if any appeal against this decision is unsuccessful.

Any notice of appeal against this decision to order a change of name must be given within one month of the date of this order. Appeal is to the High Court in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and to the Court of Session in Scotland.

The company adjudicator must be advised if an appeal is lodged, so that implementation of the order is suspended.

Date 6 August 2020

Christopher Bowen
Company Names Adjudicator

1. An “offending name” means a name that, by reason of its similarity to the name associated with the applicant in which he claims goodwill, would be likely to be the subject of a direction under section 67 (power of Secretary of State to direct change of name), or to give rise to a further application under section 69. ↩