Legal Protections for Minority Shareholders - UK Essays.
Academia.edu is a platform for academics to share research papers.Foss v Harbottle (1843) 67 ER 189 is a leading English precedent in corporate law. In any action in which a wrong is alleged to have been done to a company, the proper claimant is the company itself.THE path to a successful derivative action for a minority shareholder is often a difficult one. In addition to demonstrating that one of the exceptions to the rule in Foss v. Harbottle applies, the courts have tended to add a number of additional requirements.
In corporate law, the derivative action mechanism allows minority shareholders to file and litigate on behalf of the company a lawsuit against a corporate insider whose action has allegedly injured the company. The derivative action is a mechanism.The issue of who is a proper claimant, an explanation was made by Jenkins LJ in the case of Edwards v Halliwell where there were two limbs to the rule in Foss v Harbottle (1843): If a wrong is done to the company, the company is to be the proper plaintiff that only the company may sue and an individual shareholder or a group of shareholders may not sue.
Minority shareholders’ right to Derivative Action Foss v Harbottle case was a foundation of development of derivative action that enables a minority shareholder to bring a legal action in order to recover from a wrong done to the company.. This essay will argue that this is an apt analogy as separate legal personality while providing.
