top of page

Shareholder’s Rights: Key Take Away from the recent Federal Court decision in Low Cheng Teik & Ors v Low Ean Nee [2024] 9 CLJ 171

Mike Lee Seang Yik

The Federal Court addressed the distinction between an oppression action and a derivative action in corporate law, focusing on the legal test to determine which is the appropriate recourse for a shareholder's complaint.


Some of the key points:


  1. Oppression vs. Derivative Action: The main difference lies in whether the harm is personal to the shareholder or affects the company. An oppression action (under Section 346 of the Companies Act 2016) involves direct personal wrong or injury to the shareholder, while a derivative action (under Section 347) addresses harm done to the company.


  2. Legal Test for Oppression: To bring an oppression action, the shareholder must show that the act, omission, or misconduct was oppressive, unfairly prejudicial, or discriminatory against them, with the loss being distinct to them and not reflective of harm to the company.


  3. Legal Test for Derivative Action: If the injury or loss is to the company and affects all shareholders equally, the claim should be pursued as a derivative action, where the company itself is the proper party to sue.


The Federal Court also reiterated the rule against reflective loss i.e. when a company suffers a wrong, individual shareholders cannot claim for personal loss if their loss is merely reflective of the company’s overall loss.

10 views

Comments


Commenting has been turned off.

© Copyright of Chan Lee & Co 2022

All rights are reserved

Suite No. 508, Block C,

Pusat Dagangan Phileo Damansara 1, 
No. 9 Jalan 16/11, Off Jalan Damansara,
46350 Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan.

Tel: +603 5870 3111

Privacy Policy (English | Malay)

bottom of page