Abstract

The shareholder’s derivative suit was developed by courts of equity as an exception to the majority rule. It provides opportunity for a minority shareholder to bring an action in the name and on behalf of the company to redress wrongs done to the company by directors who are in control. This paper examines the shareholder’s derivative suit in Nigeria under the Companies and Allied Matters Act 1990. It highlights the procedural obstacles and financial burdens on the shareholder and suggests that the requirement of notice on the directors should be excused in cases of fraud and illegal transactions by the directors. It also suggests that, a derivative action being a corporate action initiated by the shareholder in the name of the company and on its behalf, the company should be made to bear not only reasonable legal fees but also all the expenses connected with the proceedings. Keywords : derivative suit, majority rule, management control, minority rights DOI: 10.7176/JLPG/94-12 Publication date: February 29 th 2020

Highlights

  • It is a general principle of corporate law that directors owe their duties to their company, not the shareholders who own the company

  • The shareholder’s derivative suit was developed by courts of equity as an exception to the majority rule. It provides opportunity for a minority shareholder to bring an action in the name and on behalf of the company to redress wrongs done to the company by directors who are in control

  • This paper examines the shareholder’s derivative suit in Nigeria under the Companies and Allied Matters Act 1990

Read more

Summary

Introduction

It is a general principle of corporate law that directors owe their duties to their company, not the shareholders who own the company.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call