We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Nobody downloaded yet


Comments (0)
Opinion To: Law Firm Re: Minority Shareholders of ArrowCar Ltd. Date: Background: The firm represents the minority shareholders of Arrowcar Ltd. who hold 45 per cent of the shares in ArrowCar. The 45 per cent shareholders seek advice on the arbitrary acts by the majority shareholders, who have adopted a policy that advances environmentally safe cars rather than the maximisation of profits…
Download full paper
Read TextPreview

Extract of sample

Download file to see previous pages... Legal Issues: The issue relative to the decision to limit shareholders’ dividend by the majority shareholders who sit on the board of directors raises the question of corporate social responsibility and how that impacts directors’ duties. Corporate social responsibility dictates the extent to which directors should take account of all stakeholder interest including non-shareholders. The issue relative to the $20 million investment in the subsidiary and tripling the wages of assembly wages in the Vietnam subsidiary raises questions pertaining to the extent to which directors’ duty toward the company’s best interest is breached by such an investment. If the payment is considered gratuitous it will not be considered in the best interest of the company. Another issue is whether or not the minority shareholders can take derivative action against the directors for the company. Each of these issues are considered below. A. Corporate Social Responsibility Corporate social is not specifically provided for in Australian company legislation. The Australian Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services (PJCCFS) 2006 states that Australia’s primary company statute allows “directors to have regard to the interests of stakeholders other than shareholders” and as a result the current legislation does not need to be amended to specifically provide for it.1 For this purpose, non-shareholder stakeholders are employees, creditors, clients, the industry and the impact of company decisions and products on the “surrounding social and natural environment”, the state and the wider community.2 By virtue of the common law and Section 181 of the Corporations Act 2001, directors have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of the company.3 The main question is whether or not the best interest of the company includes the interest of non-shareholder stakeholders. Some guidance can be found in the common law. The investment of the $20 million in the Vietnamese subsidiary is considered by reference to Parke v Daily News Ltd. In this case, the company attempted to pass a resolution permitting the payment of benefits to former employees of the company. It was ruled that the proposed payment was entirely gratuitous and therefore ultra vires the company’s objectives.4 Similarly in Re Lee, Behrens and Co. Ltd the court held that the payment of an annual pension to a former director’s widow, was: Expenditure of the company’s money and that money can only be spent for the purposes reasonably incidental to carrying on of the company’s business.5 Eve J. devised a test by which to determine whether an expenditure or investment was in the company’s best interest. First, it must be ascertained that the transaction was “reasonably incidental to the carrying on of the company’s business.”6 Secondly, the transaction must be bona fide and thirdly, it must be done for the “benefit and to promote the prosperity of the company.”7 Although the cases cited above are English, they have been used by the Australian judiciary. For example in Woolworths v Kelly, Mahoney JA stated that: A company may decide to be generous with those with whom it deals. But I – put the matter in general terms – ...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Comments (0)
Click to create a comment
Organisation law case study
They also undertook an expansion of business to Alaska without a proper assessment of the legal and financial issues involved. The purchase price for the equipment was twice as high in comparison with the original price they were paying to the former supplier.
10 Pages(2500 words)Research Paper
General Motors
However after gaining industry dominance, Nancy Koehn - Harvard’s James E. Robison Professor of Business Administration – points out at the same executive for leading the company to decline due to a failure of leadership (Staff 14). Nancy Rottering, a former finance executive at GM, describes how GMs executives isolated themselves from the rest of the company (“The Rise and Fall of General Motors” 4).
2 Pages(500 words)Research Paper
General science
From the discovery of the telegraph, which played an essential role in the French revolution, to the firefighters and paramedics who came in on their day after the witnessing the World Trade Center Towers attacked on the television. Today, the application if the Internet has become accepted and entrenched collective purpose tools amid the regular people.
6 Pages(1500 words)Research Paper
General science
For the scope of this paper, we will focus on the hazards resulting from construction works as one of the human activities. Many accidents and other dangers are due to irresponsiveness by people on construction ground. In order to minimize the level of damages in construction sites, there are structures which the stakeholders must abide with.
5 Pages(1250 words)Research Paper
Incentives and Disincentives for Corporations entering the Texan financial industry compared to other U.S. states in general
Finance is a major factor in the economic development of any entity. Over 400,000 personnel in the state of Texas are employed by its significant financial sector. For the last five years, the Lone Star State has had has more finance and insurance jobs than the states of California, Illinois, Florida, and Georgia.
11 Pages(2750 words)Research Paper
Corporations Law
At the close of the last financial year Chitchat had earned its owners $19 million and employs 35 people with prospects of increasing the number of employees. The three are close friends and they amicably share the day to day responsibilities of maintaining the application.
8 Pages(2000 words)Essay
Taking shareholder rights seriously. ( Australia Enterprise Law)
espouse their causes effectively, and they have been relegated to the position of second fiddling to the decisions of the majority shareholders, who have representation in the management or they are in a position to influence the decision making process in their best interest.
16 Pages(4000 words)Research Paper
Australian contract law
ogative of Big Oil Ltd to transfer its interest to a company in which it has 40% stake, and for the Victorian Government to lift planning restrictions in favor of Big Oil Ltd. The second contract, on the other hand, stipulates, among others, a concession of 50% Council rates in
6 Pages(1500 words)Research Paper
General Electric
General Electric is one of the most prominent companies that has been the forefront runner in their market for many years. This prodigious company was initiated by a brilliant man known as Thomas Edison in
2 Pages(500 words)Research Paper
General Motors
Undoubtedly, such negative effects hampered the share market of GM to a substantial extent being many of its large brands, including Chevrolet as well as Cadillac, and many of its prime subsidiaries sold out. Subsequent to its bankruptcy position, GM and its three associate
2 Pages(500 words)Research Paper
Let us find you another Research Paper on topic AUSTRALIAN CORPORATIONS LAW: GENERAL for FREE!
Contact us:
Contact Us Now
FREE Mobile Apps:
  • About StudentShare
  • Testimonials
  • FAQ
  • Blog
  • Free Essays
  • New Essays
  • Essays
  • The Newest Essay Topics
  • Index samples by all dates
Join us:
Contact Us