Abstract
An environmental protection measure will have an effect on international trade when it affects market access of goods and services. The objectives of this paper are to explore the international trade rules that need to be complied by the government of Malaysia with respect to invoking environmental protection measures and secondly, to look into the government’s compliance with international trade rules when invoking such measures. The international trade rules that need to be complied in this study are the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Malaysia’s environmental protection measures can be found in Malaysia’s domestic laws such as the Plant Quarantine Act 1976, Food Act 1983, Fisheries Act 1985 and national policies. The methodology employed in this study was by analyzing WTO and GATT agreements and decisions by the Dispute Settlement Bodies of the WTO in international dispute cases and also by analyzing Malaysia’s regulations in order to find out how far the government has complied with these international trade rules. The significance of this study is to recognize Malaysia’s efforts in dealing with international trade rules when invoking environmental protection measures.
Highlights
Members of a company play a vital role at a general meeting by way of direct participation in running the affairs of the company
The findings showed that shareholder participation can be supported by various theories including corporate personality theory; agency theory; contract theory; shareholder primacy; and corporate governance
The above theories are not modelled on shareholder participation in annual general meeting (AGM) they can be linked with shareholder participation in AGMs
Summary
Members of a company play a vital role at a general meeting by way of direct participation in running the affairs of the company They must be treated fairly, regardless of the percentage of their shareholding in the company and generally, are entitled to enjoy some basic rights provided under the law. The board is in charge of the day-to-day activities of the company because it is difficult for all the shareholders to participate in the management of the company.[1] the board of directors owes a fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of the company.[2] The board is accountable to the shareholders in the general meeting.[3] In this regard, sections 81, 213, 227(1), and 228 of the CAMA recognised the right of shareholders to receive notice; attend and vote in AGMs. In the English case of Sharp v. In the AGM shareholders exercise their right including the removal of directors based on section 262 of the CAMA
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
