Download file to see previous pages...
Australia is a nation with strong legal system with a higher level of legal protection for shareholders and creditors2 compared to other nations (La Porta et al, 1998, 1999).In this essay, the various issues concerning the minority shareholder rights in Australia and the different ways by which the shareholder rights may be protected are discussed in detail. This is organized as follows. In the second section, the theoretical perspectives of corporate governance and the problems between directors and shareholders are discussed. In the third section, the directors and shareholders; rights and obligations are discussed. In the fourth section, various issues regarding the minority shareholder rights are discussed. In the fifth section, various remedies for protecting minority shareholder rights are discussed in detail. The fifth section concludes the essay.
Starting from classical economists like Smith (1776), Berle, and Means (1932), many studies have been done on the conflicts of interests between the principal or investors and the agent or managers. The idea of separating the concepts of ownership and control has been developed based on these studies. The role of corporate governance comes in this context.
According to Shleifer and Vishny (1997), corporate governance is given a broad definition.Corporate governance “ deals with the ways in which suppliers of finance to corporations assure themselves of getting a return on their investment”. OECD(1999) defines corporate governance as “the system by which business corporations are directed and controlled. The corporate governance structure specifies the distribution of rights and responsibilities among different participants in the corporation, such as the board, managers, shareholders and other stakeholders, and spells out the rules and procedures for making decisions on corporate affairs. By doing this, it also provides the structure through which the company objectives are
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Dr. Herman H.H. van Erp (1999) claims that democracy must "legitimize itself by an appeal to some conception of the common good and not by majority interests. Nevertheless, it requires an implementation of the common good through some kind of majority rule"2.
Marx argues the need for man to explore himself, within himself, Marx is of the opinion that it is futile for man to search here and there as all the answers and solutions lie within him. "Man, who looked for a superhuman being in the fantastic reality of heaven and found nothing there but the reflection of himself, will no longer be disposed to find but the semblance of himself, only an inhuman being, where he seeks and must seek his true reality" (Marx, 1844).
Madison asserts, "The prescriptions in favor of liberty ought to be levelled against that quarter where the greatest danger lies, namely, that which possesses the highest prerogative of power. But this is not found in either the Executive or Legislative departments of Government, but in the body of the people, operating by the majority against the minority" (par.
On the other hand, the United States of America Constitution characterize minorities clearly too either be a product of culture, religion, topography, and earnings, otherwise those who suffered political or election defeat. These categories of people were provided the fundamental rights that all the other citizens enjoy.
Indeed, there are several places in the Constitution where suspicion of unchecked majority power is evident - from the Bill of Rights to the structure of the Senate to the Electoral College. To be sure, some historical events that ran relatively concurrent with the birth of the United States, primarily the French Revolution and its associated "Reign of Terror," provided ample illustration of the potential for majority rule to degenerate into mob rule.
‘Immigration’ and ‘refugee status’ are considered from the point of view of ‘rights’. A comparison of the nature of rights of ‘immigrants and refugees’, rights associated with ‘immigration’ by itself and
The sheriff’s title is still in existence up to present day but he has very few people under his authority. Most of the duties he used to perform have now been placed under the Police services. However, in certain remote areas of the country, Sheriffs are still responsible
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.
Human rights are absolute and cannot be taken away merely due to personal preferences. It is also undividable and cannot be selected according to choice that supports honour. Human rights are retained by the government to the people, signifying that public units should
Moreover, the basic functions in which human rights were created to serve were to ensure equality among men in different spheres of life, and endowed individuals with an opportunity to have life, liberty and happiness in all corners of the planet.
6 Pages(1500 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Issues concerning the rights of minority members in Australia and the manner in which shareholder rights may be protected for FREE!