Howard Smith v Ampol Petroleum [1974] UKPC 3
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 07:05:42 UTC
Company was subject to rival takeover bids from two of its shareholders.
One bidder had 55% of shares, but was clear that the other offer was better for company. Thus directors of company allotted $10 million of new shares to preferred bidder to give him majority.
Held
-
Power is exercised properly where “substantial purpose” for which power was exercised is proper.
'Substantial purpose’: i.e. the dominant or primary purpose
On facts, issue of shares was entirely to dilute power of majority shareholder.
Thus was breach of duty.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
Mills v Mills
Directors voted to pay out profits of a company in form of bonus shares to ordinary shareholders (instead of dividends). As result, voting power of preference shareholders was severely diminished. Cl...
Hogg v Cramphorn
In corporate governance, directors are guided by fiduciary duties to prioritize the company's best interests. This involves strategic decisions like issuing shares and lending money to maintain contr...
Brown v British Abrasive Wheel Co
Company needed urgent capital. Shareholders, holding 98% of shares, were willing to put money up on condition that they could buy out remaining 2% of shareholders. Majority proposed special resolutio...
Sidebottom v Kershaw
Company altered its articles by adding provision allowing directors the power to buy out, at a fair price, any shareholder who competed with the business of the company. A minority shareholder, who c...
Re Sunrise Radio Ltd
Claimant had 15% shareholding in a company. Company made issue of shares despite knowing that Claimant would be unable to exercise her rights to pre-emption, and as result shareholders was decreased...
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.