The common law (in Gambotto’s case) provides a remedy for a minority shareholder whose shares are being expropriated by the majority shareholders

    The common law (in Gambotto’s case) provides a remedy for a minority shareholder whose shares are being expropriated by the majority shareholders. The Corporations Act 2001 (in section 232) provides remedies for shareholders who claim that they have suffered some form of oppression. Your task is to compare these two types of remedy and explain what practical differences there are between them in terms of the types of case that they cover
    .
    Question 2 (10 marks)
    The English case of Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver [1942] 1 All ER 378 was decided under the general law applying in the United Kingdom in the 1940’s. Analyse and advise on how the case would be argued if the same facts arose under the modern Australian statute law.

    Format: One file in .doc or .docx (MSWord) format, double- or 1½- spaced, 12-point font.

    Presentation (5 marks)
    A mark between 0 and 5 will be available for the professional qualities of your work. This includes things like: structure and formatting with consistent headings, fonts and page numbering; spell-checking; logical flow; conciseness and relevance; general user-friendliness. Answers must address the actual question asked. You will not receive marks for copying slabs of text with no attempt to select relevant information.

                                                                                                                                      Order Now