- This topic has 8 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
- Posts
mike , subdividing shares of another class with the incidental effect of increasing the voting strenght of that other class, is the variation of class right
i think its change of class right voting right is class right is i am correct if not then whyBecause case law shows differently! There was no change in the rights of the “weakened” class so if there’s no change in their rights then ….there’s no change in their rights
I seem to remember the case was Rights and Issues Investment Trust v Stylo Shoes – but I’ve not mentioned that case in many a long year so it could very well be wrong
They didn’t change voting rights! They started off with one vote per share and they finished up with one vote per share! How is that changing their voting rights?
he is saying in question by subdividing shares to increase voting strenght so thats right of holder and they are increasing their strenght so it change of right
No. Those shares had one vote per share. After the amendment, those shares still had one vote per share. So what rights have been changed? Is “one vote per share” different in any way than “one vote per share”?
The court said “Where a person enters into a company as a shareholder knowing that he is to be deprived of control, he cannot complain if he continues to be deprived of control”
Put this into google ….. rights and issues investment trust v stylo shoes
mike the concept is that lets say a 50p share is subdivided into 10p five share this is not change of class right as the voting right per share is 1 as previous
but lets say company pass resolution that each oridinary share hold addtional 1 vote per share
which means now oridinary holder has 2 voting right per share which is previously one per share this is change of class right
its correct mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.