header-logo header-logo

09 March 2007 / Ailbhe O'neill
Issue: 7263 / Categories: Features , Company
printer mail-detail

Reforming the derivative suit

Protecting minority shareholders is vital for effective corporate governance, says Ailbhe O’Neill

The protection of the minority shareholder is today seen as a key feature of an effective corporate governance regime. The common law, with its tradition of protecting property rights, is generally considered to offer strong protection to the minority shareholder. Civilian jurisdictions in continental Europe and south east Asian legal systems have traditionally not provided much protection for private property and have left the minority shareholder in a relatively weak position.

The derivative suit

One of the key protections the common law developed to protect minority shareholders is the derivative suit. Often referred to as the ‘one true exception’ to the rule in Foss v Harbottle (1843) 2 Hare 461, 67 ER 189, the derivative suit has been seen as an important aspect of corporate governance reform outside of the common law world.

At a time when other jurisdictions are looking to replicate the derivative suit as part of their legal protection for minority shareholders, the UK has decided to codify

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll