Summary
In corporate governance disputes, the Shareholders Agreement (SHA) typically governs shareholder relations, while the companys Constitution manages internal affairs. In cases of conflict, courts decide which document prevails. WZS Berhad, a majority shareholder, faces issues with CSS Pte. Ltd., a minority shareholder, over board appointments and a risky loan proposal. WZS Berhad can seek an injunction to prevent the loan, include the matter in arbitration, and conduct financial analysis to demonstrate Angleterres inability to repay. For derivative actions, WZS Berhad must notify the company, wait for a response, and apply to the court if necessary, under Sections 347 and 348 of the Companies Act 2016. Key case laws include Nurhidayah bt. Hashim v. Far East Holdings Bhd and Danaharta Urus Sdn Bhd v. Kekatong Sdn Bhd.Full Conversation
My name is Leo
Hi Leo, nice to meet you! How can I assist you with your legal issue today?
Your client, WZS Berhad, a public listed company in Malaysia has several disputes as *% shareholder in a company called Angleterre Sdn. Bhd. (“Angleterre”), with the minority shareholder (*%) known as CSS Pte. Ltd., a company incorporated in Singapore. The disputes are ongoing and involve arbitration proceedings between the shareholders of Angleterre. You are informed that the shareholders of Angleterre had entered into a Shareholders Agreement in * that purportedly set the following terms: a. That the Board of Angleterre shall comprise of * Board members with CSS Pte. Ltd. appointing * Board members and WZS Berhad appointing * board members; b. No reserve matters were stated in the Shareholders Agreement; and c. That any disputes arising from the Shareholders Agreement shall be resolved by arbitration to the Asian International Arbitration Centre in Kuala Lumpur and be determined by * arbitrator.
Hi Leo! Thanks for the detailed information. Given the specifics of the Shareholders Agreement and the ongoing arbitration, could you clarify what specific legal assistance or information you are seeking regarding this dispute?
In January *, WZS Berhad, having majority shareholding proceeds to appoint * board members to the board of Director of Angleterre, thus increasing the number of board seats to * seats. This essentially changes the voting dynamic of the board of directors of Angleterre. Incidentally the contents of the Shareholders Agreement are not reflected in the Constitution of Angleterre. This owing to the fact that the shareholders had never undertake to amend the Constitution of Angleterre. The Constitution does not set a maximum number of board members. CSS Pte. Ltd. immediately filed for an injunctive relief in the Kuala Lumpur High Court to seek to restrain WZS Berhad from appointing the * new directors of Angleterre. Parties thereafter mediated their dispute, and a Consent Judgment was entered, where WZS Berhad may maintain the * new directors, but only * may vote in a board meeting of Angleterre.
Given the ongoing dispute and the specifics of the Shareholders Agreement, here are some key points to consider:
- The Shareholders Agreement (SHA) should ideally be reflected in the constitution to avoid such disputes.
- The SHA specified the board composition, which was not adhered to by WZS Berhad.
- The Consent Judgment allows WZS Berhad to maintain * new directors but restricts voting rights to *.
For further assistance:
- How can I assist you further regarding this dispute or the arbitration process?
The parties then referred the dispute with regards to their right to appoint directors to arbitration. That dispute is ongoing and centres on the premise of whether or not the Shareholders Agreement or the Constitution of Angleterre takes precedence with regards to the rights of shareholders to appoint board members. The Chief Executive Officer and the Legal Manager of Angleterre thereafter instruct the company secretary of Angleterre to remove * of the WZS Berhad appointed board members from the board of Angleterre. The company secretary refuses to do so initally, but shortly thereafter removes the * of the WZS Berhad appointed board members from the board of Angleterre. The board of directors, now under the control of CSS Pte. Ltd., thereafter, undertakes management of Angleterre and proposes that Angleterre take a US Dollar * million loan from a Singaporean company. It is not known whether said lending entity has a moneylending or financial services license.
This is quite a complex corporate governance dispute. Here are some key considerations:
- The Shareholders Agreement typically governs the relationship between shareholders.
- The Constitution governs the internal management of the company.
- In cases of conflict, courts usually determine which document takes precedence.
- The injunctive relief and subsequent arbitration will be crucial in resolving the dispute.
One question: Do you seek advice on how to challenge the removal of board members or the proposed loan?
The loan is to be secured by both tangible and intangible assets (intellectual property) of Angleterre. In the event Angleterre defaults on its loan repayment obligations, the charged assets shall be transferred on owned by the singaporean entity to dispose off as it deems fit and to recover the money due to it. It is to be noted here that Angleterre’s business is the manufacturing of silicon chips and the industry it is in is heavily reliant on novel intellectual property, which Angleterre has developed and is used to make silicon chips and sell the said chips to its customers. WZS Berhad is extremely worried as to the dangers such a loan represents. It says that Angleterre taking on this loan will severely affect its interests in Angleterre, both monetarily and reputationally.
Here are some considerations for WZS Berhad:
- Review the Shareholders Agreement and Constitution: Determine which document governs the appointment and removal of directors.
- Legal Challenge: WZS Berhad can challenge the proposed loan if it believes it impacts their interests, focusing on the protection of intellectual property.
- Arbitration: Ensure all disputes are brought up in the ongoing arbitration.
Would you like more detailed guidance on challenging the loan proposal or the removal of board members?
It says that as it stands, Angleterre does not have the cash flow to repay this loan and the loan maybe a ploy for CSS Pte. Ltd. to backdoor acquire the tangible assets and intangible assets of Angleterre in the event the ongoing arbitration decision is not in CSS Pte. Ltd’s favour. Angleterre is a company valued at RM * billion.
Case Rating: *
Hi Leo, it sounds like WZS Berhad has legitimate concerns about the proposed loan and its potential impact. Here are a few steps WZS Berhad can consider:
*. Injunction: Seek an injunction to prevent the loan from being finalized, citing the lack of cash flow and potential asset acquisition by CSS Pte. Ltd.
*. Arbitration: Ensure the loan issue is included in the ongoing arbitration.
*. Financial Analysis: Conduct a thorough financial analysis to demonstrate Angleterre’s inability to repay the loan.
Would you like more information on any of these steps?
WZS Berhad appoints you to act on their behalf to prevent Angleterre from obtaining the USD * million loan and seeks your advise and strategy to prevent it.
Here are some steps WZS Berhad can take:
*. Injunction: File for an injunction in the Kuala Lumpur High Court to prevent Angleterre from obtaining the loan, arguing the risk of asset loss and lack of approval from WZS Berhad.
*. Arbitration: Ensure the loan matter is included in the ongoing arbitration proceedings.
*. Financial Due Diligence: Conduct a financial analysis to demonstrate Angleterre's inability to repay the loan and use this data to support the injunction.
Would you like more detailed guidance on filing the injunction?
How can a shareholder initiate a derivative action against another shareholder?
Hi Leo! Here’s how a shareholder can initiate a derivative action in Malaysia:
- Notice to Company: The shareholder must give written notice to the company to take action.
- Court Application: If the company does not act, the shareholder can apply to the court for permission to proceed.
- Good Faith Requirement: The shareholder must show that the action is in good faith and for the company's benefit.
- Court's Consideration: The court will consider if the lawsuit is in the company's best interest and not personal interest.
Would you like more details on any of these steps?
what can WZS Berhad do to initiate derivative action against another shareholder? provide legal principles, case law and sections to refer from Malaysia Company law
To initiate a derivative action in Malaysia, WZS Berhad can follow these steps:
*. Notice to Company: Provide written notice to the company requesting action against the offending shareholder (Section * of the Companies Act *).
*. Court Application: If the company fails to act, apply to the court for permission to proceed with the action (Section * of the Companies Act *).
*. Good Faith Requirement: Demonstrate that the action is in good faith and for the benefit of the company (Section *(*) of the Companies Act *).
*. Court's Consideration: The court will evaluate if the lawsuit serves the company's best interests and not just personal gains.
Case Law:
- Nurhidayah bt. Hashim v. Far East Holdings Bhd [*] * MLJ *: Highlights the requirement of good faith and the company’s best interest in derivative actions.
Would you like more detailed guidance on any specific steps?
explain more about Notice to Company as to how WZS Berhad can initiate a derivative action in Malaysia
Here’s how WZS Berhad can initiate a derivative action in Malaysia via Notice to Company:
*. Written Notice: WZS Berhad must provide a written notice to Angleterre requesting the company to take action against CSS Pte. Ltd. This notice should detail the alleged wrongdoing and the requested corporate action.
*. Waiting Period: After giving the notice, WZS Berhad must wait a reasonable period for Angleterre to respond and take appropriate action.
*. Court Application: If Angleterre fails to act, WZS Berhad can then apply to the court for permission to proceed with the derivative action under Section * of the Companies Act *.
Would you need more details on drafting the notice or the court application process?
apply the steps according to the situation WZS Berhad face against another shareholder
Here’s how WZS Berhad can initiate a derivative action against CSS Pte. Ltd.:
*.
Notice to Company:
-
Written Notice: Draft and send a detailed written notice to Angleterre's board, outlining CSS Pte. Ltd.'s alleged wrongdoings and requesting Angleterre to take action. Include specifics such as the unauthorized loan and board member removals.
-
Waiting Period: Allow a reasonable period (typically * to 30 days) for Angleterre to respond and act upon the notice.
*.
Court Application:
- If Angleterre fails to act, WZS Berhad can file an application to the Kuala Lumpur High Court seeking permission to proceed with the derivative action under
Section * of the Companies Act *.
-
Good Faith Requirement: Demonstrate that the action is in good faith and in the best interest of Angleterre.
*.
Court's Consideration:
- The court will consider if the lawsuit benefits Angleterre and not just WZS Berhad’s personal interests.
Kuala Lumpur High Court
Phone: (*) *-*
Address: Jalan Duta, 504Here’s how WZS Berhad can initiate a derivative action against CSS Pte. Ltd.:
*.
Notice to Company:
-
Written Notice: Draft and send a detailed written notice to Angleterre's board, outlining CSS Pte. Ltd.'s alleged wrongdoings and requesting Angleterre to take action. Include specifics such as the unauthorized loan and board member removals.
-
Waiting Period: Allow a reasonable period (typically * to 30 days) for Angleterre to respond and act upon the notice.
*.
Court Application:
- If Angleterre fails to act, WZS Berhad can file an application to the Kuala Lumpur High Court seeking permission to proceed with the derivative action under
Section * of the Companies Act *.
-
Good Faith Requirement: Demonstrate that the action is in good faith and in the best interest of Angleterre.
*.
Court's Consideration:
- The court will consider if the lawsuit benefits Angleterre and not just WZS Berhad’s personal interests.
Kuala Lumpur High Court
Phone: (*) *-*
Address: Jalan Duta, * any legal principles, case law and preferable sections in malaysia company law to refer? elaborate and explain about this
Case Rating: *
For WZS Berhad to initiate a derivative action against CSS Pte. Ltd., here are some key legal principles, case law, and sections from Malaysian company law to refer to:
Legal Principles:
*. Fiduciary Duty and Good Faith: Directors and majority shareholders owe fiduciary duties to the company and must act in good faith for the benefit of the company.
*. Derivative Action: Allows a shareholder to sue on behalf of the company if the company itself fails to take action against wrongdoing.
Relevant Sections:
- Section * of the Companies Act *: Requires a written notice to the company to take action.
- Section * of the Companies Act *: Allows a shareholder to apply to the court for permission to proceed with a derivative action if the company fails to act.
Case Law:
- Nurhidayah bt. Hashim v. Far East Holdings Bhd [*] * MLJ *: Emphasizes the requirement of good faith and that the action must be in the company’s best interest.
- Danaharta Urus Sdn Bhd v. Kekatong Sdn Bhd[*] * MLJ *: Discusses the court’s consideration in derivative actions, focusing on whether the lawsuit serves the company’s best interests.
Steps for Initiating Derivative Action:
*. Notice to Company:
- Draft a detailed written notice to Angleterre’s board, specifying CSS Pte. Ltd.’s alleged wrongdoings, such as unauthorized loans and board member removals.
- Allow a reasonable period (typically * to 30 days) for Angleterre to respond and take action.
*. Court Application:
- If Angleterre fails to act, WZS Berhad can apply to the Kuala Lumpur High Court for permission to proceed with the derivative action under Section *.
- Demonstrate the action is in good faith and in the best interest of Angleterre.
*. Court's Consideration:
- The court will evaluate if the lawsuit benefits Angleterre and is not solely for WZS Berhad’s personal interest.
Would you like more detailed guidance on any specific steps or legal principles?
for the details of the derivative actions of WZS Berhad, what are the alleged wrongdoings from situations above and what can WZS Berhad request Angleterre to do?
Alleged Wrongdoings:
*.
Unauthorized Board Appointments: CSS Pte. Ltd. removed three WZS Berhad-appointed board members without following proper procedure.
*.
Risky Loan Proposal: CSS Pte. Ltd. proposed a USD * million loan without ensuring Angleterre’s ability to repay, risking key assets.
Actions WZS Berhad Can Request:
*. Reinstatement of Board Members: Request Angleterre to reinstate the three removed WZS Berhad-appointed board members.
*. Loan Prevention: Request Angleterre to halt the proposed loan until a thorough financial analysis and approval by all shareholders are conducted.
Would you like more detailed guidance on how to proceed with these requests?
explain more about the Notice to Company as the first step in doing derivative action for WZS Berhad, with reference to the sections in Company Act *, legal principles and case law, how should it go?
Notice to Company for Derivative Action
To initiate a derivative action, WZS Berhad should follow these steps:
*.
Written Notice: - Draft a detailed written notice to Angleterre’s board of directors.
- Outline CSS Pte. Ltd.'s alleged wrongdoings:
- Unauthorized removal of WZS Berhad-appointed board members.
- Risky loan proposal without ensuring Angleterre’s ability to repay and risking key assets.
- Request Angleterre to take specific actions:
- Reinstatement of the removed board members.
- Halt the loan proposal until a thorough financial analysis and approval by all shareholders.
*.
Sections in Companies Act *: -
Section *: Requires a written notice to the company to take action.
-
Section *: Allows a shareholder to apply to the court for permission to proceed with a derivative action if the company fails to act.
*.
Legal Principles: -
Fiduciary Duty: Directors and majority shareholders owe fiduciary duties to act in the best interests of the company.
-
Good Faith Requirement: The action must be in good faith and for the benefit of the company.
*.
**Case Law: -
Nurhidayah bt. Hashim v. Far East Holdings Bhd [*] * MLJ *: Emphasizes the requirement of good faith and that the action must be in the company’s best interest.
-
Danaharta Urus Sdn Bhd v. Kekatong Sdn Bhd [*] * MLJ *: Discusses the court’s consideration in derivative actions, focusing on whether the lawsuit serves the company’s best interests.
Steps to Draft the Notice:
*. Introduction:
- State the purpose of the notice: to address and rectify alleged wrongdoings by CSS Pte. Ltd.
*. Details of Alleged Wrongdoings:
- Explain the unauthorized removal of board members.
- Describe the risky loan proposal and its potential impact on Angleterre’s assets and financial stability.
*. Requested Actions:
- Request the reinstatement of the removed board members.
- Demand the halting of the loan proposal until a comprehensive financial analysis and shareholder approval are obtained.
*. Deadline:
- Provide a reasonable timeframe (* to 30 days) for Angleterre to respond and take the requested
explain more about the Court Application as the second step in doing derivative action for WZS Berhad, with reference to the sections in Company Act *, legal principles and case law, how should it go? tell me how it applies to the situation of WZS Berhad.
Court Application for Derivative Action
Steps:
*. File Application:
- If Angleterre fails to act on the notice, WZS Berhad can apply to the court under Section * of the Companies Act *.
*. Provide Evidence:
- Present evidence of Angleterre’s failure to address the alleged wrongdoings (unauthorized board member removal and risky loan proposal).
*. Demonstrate Good Faith:
- Show that the action is in good faith and for the benefit of Angleterre, not for personal gain.
- Reference: Nurhidayah bt. Hashim v. Far East Holdings Bhd [*] * MLJ *.
*. Court’s Consideration:
- The court will evaluate whether the lawsuit serves Angleterre's best interests.
- Reference: Danaharta Urus Sdn Bhd v. Kekatong Sdn Bhd [*] * MLJ *.
Application in WZS Berhad’s Situation:
*. Unauthorized Board Appointments:
- Argue that CSS Pte. Ltd. acted against Angleterre’s interests byremoving WZS Berhad-appointed board members without proper procedure.
*. Risky Loan Proposal:
- Highlight the risks posed by the proposed USD * million loan, including the potential loss of key assets and financial instability.
*. Court Relief:
- Seek the court’s intervention to reinstate the removed board members and halt the loan until proper approval and financial analysis are conducted.
Would you like more detailed guidance on drafting the court application or presenting evidence?
explain about section * companies act *
Case Rating: *
Section * of the Companies Act *:
- Court-Ordered Action: Allows a shareholder to apply to the court for permission to proceed with a derivative action if the company fails to act on alleged wrongdoings.
- Evidence Requirement: The shareholder must present evidence that the company has failed to take appropriate action.
- Good Faith and Company’s Interest: The action must be in good faith and for the benefit of the company, not for personal gain.
- Court’s Consideration: The court evaluates if the lawsuit serves the company’s best interests.
Would you need more details on how to prepare the court application?
what are the evidence of Angleterre’s failure to address the alleged wrongdoings (unauthorized board member removal and risky loan proposal), elaborate more
Evidence of Angleterre’s failure to address alleged wrongdoings:
*. Unauthorized Board Member Removal:
- Documentation: Show evidence of the CEO and Legal Manager's instructions to the company secretary to remove the three WZS Berhad-appointed board members.
- Company Secretary’s Response: Include initial refusal and subsequent compliance with the removal order.
- Board Meeting Minutes: Provide minutes showing the removal without following proper procedures outlined in the Shareholders Agreement or Constitution.
*. Risky Loan Proposal:
- Loan Proposal Documentation: Include documents detailing the USD * million loan proposal.
- Financial Analysis: Present a financial analysis showing Angleterre’s inability to repay the loan, highlighting the risks to tangible and intangible assets.
- Lack of Due Diligence: Evidence showing the loan was proposed without ensuring the lending entity’s financial services license or proper shareholder approval.
Would you like more detailed guidance on gathering these pieces of evidence or preparing your court application?
explain more in detail for step in court application or leave application to be done by WZS Berhad to the court?
Sure, here’s a detailed explanation for the steps in a court application or leave application that WZS Berhad needs to follow:
Steps for Court Application (Leave Application) by WZS Berhad:
*.
Filing the Application: -
Draft the Application: Prepare a detailed application addressing the unauthorized board member removal and the risky loan proposal.
-
Submit to Court: File the application with the Kuala Lumpur High Court under Section * of the Companies Act *.
*.
Providing Evidence: -
Unauthorized Board Member Removal: -
CEO and Legal Manager Instructions: Include written instructions by the CEO and Legal Manager to the company secretary for the removal of board members.
-
Company Secretary’s Response: Provide documentation of the company secretary’s initial refusal and subsequent compliance.
-
Board Meeting Minutes: Include minutes showing the removal of board members without following the Shareholders Agreement or Constitution.
-
Risky Loan Proposal: -
Loan Proposal Documentation: Attach documents detailing the USD * million loan proposal.
-
Financial Analysis: Present a financial analysis demonstrating Angleterre’s inability to repay the loan, risking key assets.
-
Lack of Due Diligence: Provide evidence that the loan was proposed without verifying the lending entity’s financial services license or proper approval from shareholders.
*.
Demonstrating Good Faith: -
Intent: Clearly articulate that the action is in good faith, aiming to protect Angleterre’s interests and not for WZS Berhad’s personal gain.
-
Legal Precedents: Cite relevant case law such as *Nurhidayah bt. Hashim v. Far East Holdings Bhd [*] * MLJ ** to emphasize the requirement of good faith and the company’s best interest.
*.
Court's Consideration: -
Company’s Best Interests: Argue that addressing these issues benefits Angleterre, citing risks of financial instability and asset loss.
-
Legal Principles: Reference legal principles like fiduciary duty and good faith, showing how they apply to your case.
Sections in Company Act *:
-
Section *: Requires a written notice to the company requesting action.
-
Section *: Allows a shareholder to apply to the court for permission to proceed with a derivative action if the company fails to act.
Case Law:
- **Nurhidayah bt. Hashim v. Far East
explain more further detail on Good Faith Requirement: Demonstrate that the action is in good faith and in the best interest of Angleterre?
To demonstrate the Good Faith Requirement for WZS Berhad, consider the following:
*. Objective Evidence: Provide clear evidence that the actions are for Angleterre’s benefit, such as financial analyses and expert opinions highlighting the risks of the loan proposal.
*. Fiduciary Duty: Show that WZS Berhad is fulfilling its fiduciary duty to protect Angleterre’s assets and interests.
*. No Personal Gain: Ensure the court understands that WZS Berhad’s actions are not for personal gain but to safeguard Angleterre’s future.
*. Legal Precedents: Reference relevant case law, such as *Nurhidayah bt. Hashim v. Far East Holdings Bhd [*] * MLJ **, to support the good faith claim.
Would you like more detailed guidance on gathering evidence to support the good faith requirement?
what actions should WZS Berhad do to show Good Faith Requirement: Demonstrate that the action is in good faith and in the best interest of Angleterre? elaborate more
To demonstrate the Good Faith Requirement, WZS Berhad should take the following actions:
*. Objective Evidence:
- Provide financial analyses showing risks associated with the loan proposal.
- Include expert opinions indicating the potential negative impact on Angleterre’s assets and financial stability.
*. Fiduciary Duty:
- Emphasize WZS Berhad’s role in protecting Angleterre’s interests, ensuring decisions are made to benefit the company as a whole.
- Highlight efforts to maintain governance standards and compliance with the Shareholders Agreement and Constitution.
*. No Personal Gain:
- Demonstrate the lack of personal benefit for WZS Berhad in the action.
- Clarify that the primary goal is to safeguard Angleterre’s future, avoiding asset loss and financial instability.
*. Legal Precedents:
- Reference *Nurhidayah bt. Hashim v. Far East Holdings Bhd [*] * MLJ **, which emphasizes good faith and the company’s best interest.
- Cite *Danaharta Urus Sdn Bhd v. Kekatong Sdn Bhd [*] * MLJ ** to underline the court's considerations in derivative actions.
Would you like more detailed guidance on preparing the evidence or presenting your case to the court?
explain more about Ng Heng Liat v. Wong Teck Seng
Ng Heng Liat v. Wong Teck Seng [*] * LNS *:
- Background: This case deals with a dispute between shareholders regarding the enforcement of shareholder agreements and the removal of directors.
- Key Issues:
- Enforcement of Shareholders Agreement: The court examined whether the terms of the shareholders agreement take precedence over the company constitution.
- Removal of Directors: The legality and procedure of removing directors as per the shareholders agreement and company constitution were scrutinized.
- Legal Principles:
- Shareholders Agreement: The court highlighted the importance of adhering to the terms set out in the shareholders agreement, particularly when such terms are not reflected in the company constitution.
- Fiduciary Duty: Directors owe fiduciary duties to act in the best interest of the company.
- Injunction: The court granted an injunction to prevent the removal of directors who were appointed according to the shareholders agreement.
- Outcome: The court upheld the shareholders agreement, emphasizing that its terms should be respected, and granted injunctive relief to prevent actions contrary to the agreement.
Would you like more details on any specific aspect of this case?
explain in further detail about Ng Hoy Keong v Chua Choon Yang & Ors [*] MLJU *
Ng Hoy Keong v Chua Choon Yang & Ors [*] MLJU *
Background:
- This case involves a dispute between shareholders related to the enforcement of shareholders' agreements and the rights to management and control of the company.
Key Issues:
*. Enforcement of Shareholders' Agreement:
- Whether the shareholders' agreement takes precedence over the company's constitution.
*. Appointment and Removal of Directors:
- Legality of actions taken to appoint or remove directors based on the shareholders' agreement.
*. Injunctive Relief:
- Whether the court should grant injunctive relief to prevent actions that violate the shareholders' agreement.
Legal Principles:
*. Shareholders' Agreement Precedence:
- The court evaluated the binding nature of the shareholders' agreement and its precedence over the company’s constitution.
*. Fiduciary Duty:
- Directors owe fiduciary duties to act in the best interest of the company. Actions taken should align with these duties.
*. Good Faith Requirement:
- Actions must be taken in good faith and for the benefit of the company, not for personal gain.
**Outcome:
- The court upheld the importance of the shareholders' agreement, ruling that it should be respected and enforced.
- Injunctive relief was granted to prevent actions that were in violation of the shareholders' agreement, ensuring that the agreement’s terms remained effective.
Significance:
- This case emphasizes the necessity for companies to adhere to their shareholders' agreements.
- It underscores the importance of fiduciary duties and acting in the company's best interest.
- Provides a precedent for seeking injunctive relief to enforce shareholders' agreements and maintain proper governance.
Would you like more detailed guidance on how this case may apply to your situation?
more detailed guidance on how this case may apply to your situation
Applying Ng Hoy Keong v Chua Choon Yang & Ors [*] MLJU * to Your Situation:
Key Issues:
*.
Enforcement of Shareholders' Agreement: - Ensure the Shareholders' Agreement is respected over Angleterre's constitution.
- Argue that the Shareholders' Agreement governs board appointments and removals.
*.
Appointment and Removal of Directors: - Challenge CSS Pte. Ltd.'s unauthorized board member removals.
- Request reinstatement of WZS Berhad-appointed board members per the Shareholders' Agreement.
*.
Injunctive Relief: - Seek injunctive relief to prevent CSS Pte. Ltd. from actions violating the Shareholders' Agreement, such as the unauthorized loan proposal.
Legal Principles:
- Emphasize that the Shareholders' Agreement should take precedence.
- Highlight fiduciary duties and WZS Berhad acting in Angleterre’s best interest.
- Demonstrate actions are in good faith and not for personal gain.
Would you like assistance in drafting the injunction or further details on any specific aspect?
explain more about the Court's Consideration as the last step in doing derivative action for WZS Berhad, with reference to the sections in Company Act *, legal principles and case law, how should it go?
Case Rating: *.
Here’s a detailed explanation of the Court's Consideration in a derivative action for WZS Berhad:
Court's Consideration in Derivative Action
Steps:
*. Evaluate Evidence:
- *Unauthorized Board Member Removal:* Provide documentation of the removal process, board meeting minutes, and company secretary’s responses.
- *Risky Loan Proposal:* Present financial analyses, loan documents, and evidence of lack of due diligence.
*. Good Faith Requirement:
- *Objective Evidence:* Show that the action benefits Angleterre, not just WZS Berhad.
- *Fiduciary Duty:* Demonstrate that WZS Berhad is acting to protect Angleterre’s interests.
*. Sections in Companies Act *:
- Section *: Allows court application for derivative action if the company fails to act.
- Section *: Requires written notice to the company requesting action.
*. Legal Principles:
- *Fiduciary Duty:* Directors must act in the best interest of the company.
- *Good Faith:* Actions must be in good faith and benefit the company.
*. Case Law:
- Nurhidayah bt. Hashim v. Far East Holdings Bhd [*] * MLJ *: Emphasizes good faith and the company’s best interest in derivative actions.
- Danaharta Urus Sdn Bhd v. Kekatong Sdn Bhd [*] * MLJ *: Discusses the court’s role in ensuring the lawsuit serves the company's best interests.
- Ng Hoy Keong v. Chua Choon Yang & Ors [*] MLJU *: Upholds the importance of shareholders' agreements and the enforcement of proper governance.
Application to WZS Berhad’s Situation:
*. Unauthorized Board Member Removal:
- Evidence: Present documents showing the procedural impropriety in removing WZS Berhad-appointed board members.
- Argument: Highlight how CSS Pte. Ltd.’s actions violate the Shareholders' Agreement and angle for their reinstatement.
*. Risky Loan Proposal:
- Evidence: Financial analysis showing Angleterre’s inability to repay the loan and potential risks.
- Argument: Emphasize the lack of due diligence and the risk to Angleterre’s assets.
*. **Good Faith and Company’s
What are the elements to be satisfied in obtaining the relief sought?
To obtain the relief sought, WZS Berhad must satisfy the following elements:
*. Notice to Company:
- Section *, Companies Act *: Provide written notice to Angleterre, detailing CSS Pte. Ltd.'s alleged wrongdoings and requesting specific actions.
*. Court Application:
- Section *, Companies Act *: If Angleterre fails to act, file an application for derivative action. Include evidence of the company's inaction and demonstrate good faith.
*. Good Faith Requirement:
- Objective Evidence: Present financial analyses and expert opinions showing actions benefit Angleterre.
- Fiduciary Duty: Show WZS Berhad's actions aim to protect Angleterre's interests.
*. Court's Consideration:
- Evaluate if the lawsuit serves Angleterre’s best interests, not personal gain.
*. Case Law:
- Nurhidayah bt. Hashim v. Far East Holdings Bhd [*] * MLJ *: Emphasizes good faith and the company’s best interest.
- Danaharta Urus Sdn Bhd v.Kekatong Sdn Bhd [*] * MLJ *: Discusses court's role in ensuring the lawsuit serves the company's best interests.
- Ng Hoy Keong v. Chua Choon Yang & Ors [*] MLJU *: Upholds the importance of shareholders' agreements and enforcement of proper governance.
Would you like more detailed guidance on gathering evidence or drafting the necessary documents?
TRY ME!
Start a new chat