Majority Rule Essay

1635 Words7 Pages
MAJORITY RULE The majority rule in company law states that if the majority of shareholders do not wish to pursue an action then the minority is bound by that decision. The rule in foss v harbottle uphold the majority rule. The rule in Foss v Harbottle (1843) is that when a wrong has been committed against the company, the proper claimant in respect of that wrong is the company itself. The rationale for the rule is twofold: 1. It prevents a numerous of legal proceedings being brought in the respect of the same issue. If minority shareholders were permitted to initiate such proceedings there could be hundreds of actions. 2. It upholds the principle of majority rule: if the majority of shareholders do not wish to pursue an action then the minority is bound by that decision. In Foss v harbottle the claimants were two share holders in the Victoria park company. They brought an action against the company’s five directors and promoters, alleging that the defendants had misappropriated assets belonging to the company and had improperly mortgaged its property. The claimants sought an order to compel the defendants to make good the losses suffered by the company. It was held that the actions must fail. The harm in question was suffered by the whole company not just by the two shareholders. It was open to the majority in the general meeting to approve the defendants conduct. To allow the minority to bring an action in these circumstances would risk frustrating the wishes of the majority. The case of MacDougall V Gardiner (1875) is a clear application of the rule that illustrates how it fits with the principle of majority rule, where again the COA held that the basis of the complain was something that in substance the majority of the shareholders were entitled to do not an individual shareholder. Having considered the issue of standing to sue we now turn to

More about Majority Rule Essay

Open Document