In the management of the company’s affairs and decision making processes, it is generally perceived that the interest of the minority shareholders is not taken into consideration. It is chiefly due to the impression that the minority shareholders are scattered and not united…
The Australian government, judiciary and executive authorities have contributed significantly to rectify the situation earlier prevailed, to ensure protection of the interests the minority shareholders over the period of time. The paper seeks to study the gaps at the legislation as well as implementation level in transforming these policy decisions to the fulfillment of the objectives desired or intended in line with the spirit behind the process, taking into consideration, the complications involved in social background and the interpretations.
The issues connected with the shareholders are multifarious and are interconnected or interrelated to various stakeholders’ interest in a business, and hence it becomes too difficult to enumerate the various situations which could be foreseen at the time of legislation or practicable to include in statutes, which warrants interpretations in the court of law for equitable justice to the parties concerned. Direct involvement of all the members of a company in a complicated business enterprise is not feasible in modern times. Therefore the directors of the corporations are expected to exercise their powers taking into account the interests of all the stakeholders and the other stakeholders.
In Sidebottom v Kershaw, Leese & Co., the majority shareholders who were also the directors, passed a special resolution to alter the articles by allowing the directors to require the transfer at full value of shares held by an shareholder who competed with the company’s business. Minority shareholders who ran a business that competed with the company sought a declaration that the amendment was invalid. The court held that the alteration satisfied the Allen’s test in that it was taken for the company’s legitimate business interests and not for the interests of specific members.1 However in various other decisions, the treatment has differed based on the circumstances obtained in the cases.
Foss v Harbottle rule is a famous ...
Cite this document
(“Taking shareholder rights seriously. ( Australia Enterprise Law) Research Paper”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/412761-taking-shareholder-rights-seriously-australia-enterprise-law
(Taking Shareholder Rights Seriously. ( Australia Enterprise Law) Research Paper)
“Taking Shareholder Rights Seriously. ( Australia Enterprise Law) Research Paper”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/412761-taking-shareholder-rights-seriously-australia-enterprise-law.
Introduction In the past, the United States was considered to have one of the best health care systems in the whole world. The amenities and the extent of coverage offered to the people of US were extra-ordinary and unquestionable. But, in recent years, with the economic downtrend progressing at an exponential rate, the irregularities present in the system are being exposed quite often.
During the case of United States v. Bynum, 08-4207, the court failed to accept the argument from the defendant that the use of subpoenas by the government in an effort to get subscribers information from his ISP was a violation of the Fourth Amendment rights of privacy.
The main points of individual’s rights protection in Australia are presented in the Constitution, legislation Acts common developed by the Commonwealth Parliament or State or Territory Parliaments (Amponsah, 2004; Brown, 2002). Moreover, in spite of the fact that this country gives a threefold consideration about human rights protection (legal, judiciary and executive branches), there are essential gaps with respect to individuals rights protection.
ABSTRACT Administrative decision judicial review is the authority vested to review laws, court decisions, policies, or executive powers relevant to subjudice matters. The judicial reviews have been imposed in many states in search of equity and fair judgments.Judicial review has been made part of Australia’s legal process although there are no clear provisions in the constitution.
How to Negotiate an Enterprise Agreement in Australia Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Ways to Negotiate an Enterprise Agreement in Australia 3 Commencing Bargaining 4 Low-Paid Bargaining 4 Good Faith Bargaining 5 Representational Rights 5 Permitted content 6 Mandatory Content 6 Voting on the Agreement 7 Conclusion 7 7 References 8 Introduction An enterprise agreement, in general, refers to a contract between an employer and its employees got through a collective barraging process.
, the various approaches later on have recognized this view to be inappropriate and recognized the need to benefit consumers, employees and the community .Moreover, it has been well recognized that the shareholders interest need to be well regarded and the corporation’s
This has been revealed that Insurance companies are extremely exposed to great losses due to ambiguity of Insurance laws and mal-practices within medical settings.
Professional liability in medical malpractice is based on the rule of negligence within
The growth rate of the internet has been expanding at an alarming rate where recent studies indicate that the population of internet users is doubling after every three months due to the emergence of social sites as well as development of