Oppression remedy s232

1

LAW00004 Company Law

SCHOOL OF LAW & JUSTICE

Session 2, 2018

TOPIC 4.2

Members’ remedies

2

© John ORR

2

Activity 4.3.2

• Tina is a minority shareholder •  Issue deals with minority shareholder protection

• Rights and remedies of shareholders

© John ORR

Problem Style Questions — Answer Structures:

ILAC: Single Issue I – Issue L – Law A – Application of law C – Conclude

HIRAC: Multiple issues Heading Issue Rules (Law) Application Conclusion

Activity 4.3.2

This activity provides an opportunity for you to do exam summaries for members’ remedies Follow the process outlined in lectures and assess the shareholder remedies by identifying: •  standing (who can bring an action) • grounds (what grounds need to be satisfied) and • orders sought

© John ORR

3

Source of legal remedies available to members

Figure 14.1 – Balancing Interests, Text 10th ed page 426

.

Key Terms

Source: Text [14.40] 10th ed page 427

Key Terms

Table 14.1: Text [14.40] 10th ed p 427

4

Members’ remedies re breach of directors’ duties Figure 14.2 Text 10th ed p 461; 9th ed p 381

Activity 4.3.2

Examine remedies mentioned in the study guide (4.7 Remedies available to minority shareholders) See also text and lecture material to decide which ones would apply

© John ORR

Activity 4.3.2 • General law - apply the fraud on the minority doctrine – if behaviour of majority is also damaging minority shareholders

• Statutory oppression remedies sections 232-235 (oppression remedy = very important)

• Statutory derivative action in sections 236 & 237 to control the behaviour of the directors which is damaging Ripitout Mining NL

• ? section 461 (winding up) is applicable. • Consider an injunction under section 1324

© John ORR

5

Guide to problem solving

•  See text 10th ed pages 460-464

© John ORR

Fraud on the minority

Source: Glossary Text 10th ed page 768

General law: fraud on minority Examples of ‘fraud on minority’ include: • Expropriation of company property Menier v Hooper’s Telegraph Works (1874) 9 Ch App 350

•  Improper ratification of directors’ breach of duty Ngurli Ltd v McCann (1953) 90 CLR 425

• Expropriation of members’ property : Gambotto v WCP Ltd (1995) 13 ACLC 342 (revise topic 3)

The test in Gambotto > expropriation of minority shares – a valuable proprietary right – only lawfully when it is:

(i) for a proper purpose and (ii) fair in all the circumstances See examples in textbook [14.80] page 428

© John ORR

6

Members’ statutory remedies

• Part 2F.1 sections 232-234 Oppression • Part 2F.1A sections 236-242 Statutory derivative action

• Section 461 Winding up • Section 1324 Injunction • Section 1322 Procedural irregularities

© John ORR

HIRAC (approach 1) Heading: ‘Members’ Remedies’ Issue 1: Statutory Oppression Remedy (Corporations Act) Rule 1: Standing; s 234 Grounds, s 232; Orders, s 233 Issue 2: Winding Up; Rule 2(S/G/O) Issue 3: Injunction; Rule 3(S/G/O); Issue 4: Stat Derivative Action; Rule 4 (S/G/O);

Application (Issues 1,2,3 & 4) Conclusions (Issues 1,2,3 & 4)

© John ORR

HIRAC (approach 2) Heading: ‘Members’ Remedies’ Issue 1: Statutory Oppression Remedy (Corp Act) Rule 1: Standing; s 234 Grounds, s 232; Orders, s 233

Application (Issues 1) Conclusions (Issues 1)

Issue 2: Winding Up; Rule 2(S/G/O); Application; Conc. Issue 3: Injunction; Rule 3(S/G/O); Application; Conc. Issue 4: Stat Deriv Action; Rule 4 (S/G/O); Application; Conc

Application (Issues 1,2,3 & 4) Conclusions (Issues 1,2,3 & 4)

© John ORR

7

HIRAC (approach 3) Heading: ‘Members’ Remedies’ Issue 1: Statutory Oppression Remedy (Corp Act) Rule 1: Standing; s 234 Grounds, s 232; Orders, s 233

Application (Issues 1) Issue 2: Winding Up; Rule 2(S/G/O); Application 2; Issue 3: Injunction; Rule 3(S/G/O); Application 3; Issue 4: Stat Derivative Action; Rule 4 (S/G/O); Application 4

Conclusions (Issues 1,2,3 & 4)

© John ORR

Oppression Source: Popovic v Tanasijevic (No 5) [2000] SASC 87 [503] (Olsson J) (cited Study Guide p 89) ‘the word ‘oppression’ connotes the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome or unjust manner. … from authorities … … What is in contemplation is a notion of unfairness, according to ordinary standards of reasonableness and fair dealing. Conduct complained of must be unjustly detrimental to either individual members specifically or, alternatively, members as a whole’

© John ORR

Statutory Oppression Remedy: sections 232-234

Standing section 234 Standing to bring an action is found in section 234. Definition of a member in section 231 is important here although past members can apply under limited circumstances and the ASIC has some discretion. Grounds Where the company’s conduct or an actual or proposed act or omission or resolution is contrary to the interest of members as a whole OR oppressive to, unfairly prejudicial to or unfairly discriminatory against a member OR members, whether in their capacity as members or any other capacity a court may make an order under section 233 see section 232

© John ORR

8

Oppression: sections 232-234

Orders • The court has wide powers to make whatever orders are appropriate under section 233

• See section 233 especially subsections 1(a), 1(b) 1(i) 1(j).

• The oppression remedy is an important remedy for members especially in small close companies

© John ORR

Statutory Derivative Action sections 236-242

Note that section 236(3) abolished the general law ‘derivative action’ (Rule in Foss v Harbottle abolished) Standing A statutory derivative action enables a member or a former member or a person entitled to be registered as a member to initiate proceedings on behalf of the company section 236(1) Note that the proceedings are brought in the company’s name section 236(2)

© John ORR

Statutory Derivative Action Leave of the court Person initiating the action must first be granted leave of the court to bring proceedings section 237 A court must grant leave if it is satisfied as to the matters in section 237 Rebuttable presumption Section 237(3) that granting leave is not in the best interests of the company if (i) the company has decided not to bring or not to continue with the proceedings and (ii) the decision of the directors conforms to the business judgment rule (section 180(2))