Shareholder Disputes
In the life of a business, many of the more serious problems do not come from external competition; they come from changes inside the organisation.
The most common pattern is that the business starts well, but as it grows, profitability rises or direction begins to diverge, tensions gradually build between the shareholders.
If those tensions are not identified and addressed in time, they can move from “disagreement” into substantive legal disputes. For most businesses, a shareholder dispute does not start with a formal claim.
It usually shows up as a more practical operational problem: company decisions cannot be made, the parties cannot agree on profit distribution, one shareholder is gradually being excluded from management, or someone wants to exit but the parties cannot reach a deal.
Left unresolved, these issues often have a direct impact on the running of the business and can bring it to a standstill. In New South Wales, these are not only commercial issues, they are regulated by the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
Where a company’s affairs are being conducted in a manner that is oppressive or unfair, shareholders can seek relief through the courts. When NS Legal handles shareholder disputes, the starting point is not simply “who is right and who is wrong”.
The more practical question is: what is the commercial outcome that best serves you in the current situation, while minimising damage to the value of the business?
Deadlock: What Happens When the Company Cannot Make a Decision?
In small and mid-sized businesses, shareholders are usually also involved in management or sit on the board.
Once the parties disagree on a key question, for example whether to expand, whether to distribute profits or whether to take on outside investment, the business can easily fall into deadlock.
Where the company constitution or shareholders’ agreement does not provide a clear mechanism for breaking the deadlock, the situation will rarely ease on its own.
It tends instead to deteriorate over time and to have a direct impact on the running of the business. Legally and practically, this kind of issue typically requires analysis of the existing documents and structure, for example:
- Whether there is a voting mechanism or arrangement for directors’ decision-making;
- Whether there is a deadlock resolution clause (such as a buy-sell clause);
- Whether structural adjustment or third-party intervention may resolve the issue.
Where the documents do not provide a solution, a combination of negotiation strategy and legal action is usually needed to break the deadlock, rather than simply waiting for the problem to resolve itself.
Minority Shareholder Issues
In practice, the “marginalisation” of minority shareholders is very common, and it tends to happen gradually rather than as a single event.
The pattern often begins with reduced communication, followed by gradual exclusion from decision-making. Common scenarios include:
- No longer being notified of shareholder or board meetings;
- Being unable to access company financial or operational information;
- Being denied the opportunity to participate in management or decision-making;
- Having shareholder rights gradually diluted or disregarded in practice.
Under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), if the affairs of the company are being conducted in a manner that is oppressive, unfairly prejudicial or discriminatory against a shareholder, that shareholder can apply to the court for relief.
It is important to note that this kind of relief does not require the other side to have acted “unlawfully”. The key question is whether the conduct, taken as a whole, is commercially unfair.
As a result, many actions that look like ordinary “internal management decisions” can still be challenged at law.
Dividend Disputes
Profit distribution is one of the most common flashpoints in shareholder disputes. One party may want a dividend while another prefers to reinvest or expand the business.
If the position has not been settled in advance, that disagreement can easily develop into a long-running conflict. At law, dividends are generally a matter for the directors.
However, that decision must be made within a reasonable range and cannot be exercised in a manner that unfairly affects a particular shareholder. Key considerations in practice include:
- Whether the company constitution and shareholders’ agreement provide for a dividend mechanism;
- Whether the directors are exercising their discretion within a reasonable range;
- Whether there is an arrangement that favours one party’s interests;
- Whether the retention of profits is supported by a reasonable commercial rationale.
In some cases, where profits are retained over a long period and that has an adverse impact on a particular shareholder, this can be found to constitute unfair conduct and may give rise to a legal dispute.
Need clear, practical legal advice?
Exit Issues
The core of many shareholder disputes is not whether the parties should continue working together, but how they can end the relationship.
In an ideal scenario, a shareholders’ agreement would contain a clear exit mechanism, including a valuation methodology, a buy-sell process and triggering events.
In practice, such clauses are often missing or incomplete, so even where one party wants to exit, it may be difficult to achieve. Common resolution paths include:
- Negotiated transfer of shares to the remaining shareholders;
- Introducing a third-party buyer;
- Compelling a buy-out through legal proceedings;
- In extreme cases, applying for winding up of the company.
The key question is rarely “can I exit?” It is: what is the exit route that best serves you and is least disruptive to the business?
Do You Need to Go to Court?
Not every shareholder dispute needs to go to court. In fact, most disputes are resolved before formal proceedings are commenced. Common resolution paths include:
- Direct negotiation between the parties to restructure the relationship or rebalance interests;
- Lawyer-led negotiation or mediation;
- Court proceedings, only where agreement cannot be reached.
In shareholder disputes, the courts can provide a range of remedies, including ordering a compulsory share buy-out, adjusting the company’s structure or making other orders.
Court proceedings, however, generally involve time, cost and uncertainty, so whether to move into that stage needs to be assessed against the practical circumstances.
Legal Framework
In Australia, the corporations law provides shareholders with a number of protections. The most important of these is the relief available against “oppressive conduct”.
Where the affairs of a company are being conducted in a manner that:
- Is contrary to the interests of the members as a whole; or
- Is unfairly prejudicial to a particular shareholder
the court may make a range of orders, including ordering the buy-out of shares, varying the company’s arrangements or granting other appropriate relief.
Shareholders’ agreements and company constitutions also play a critical role in disputes. The outcome of many matters is in fact driven by the specific terms of these documents, rather than by general legal principles alone.
Common Causes
Most shareholder disputes do not appear out of nowhere. Their roots are usually laid in the early stages of the business and only become significant once the business has developed. Common causes include:
- The absence of a complete or clear shareholders’ agreement;
- The absence of agreement on dividends, control or exit mechanisms;
- The original structure becomes unsuitable as the business grows;
- Early issues are not addressed when they first arise.
These problems have limited impact when the business is small, but they tend to escalate quickly once profitability, financing or expansion enters the picture.
How We Can Help
In shareholder disputes, the law is a tool. What ultimately matters is achieving your commercial objectives and managing the overall risk. NS Legal typically helps clients to:
- Clarify the current legal position (shareholdings, control and document structure);
- Analyse the available resolution paths (continued cooperation, structural adjustment or exit);
- Develop a negotiation or litigation strategy;
- Represent clients in mediation or court proceedings where required.
Our focus is not simply to “resolve a dispute”, but to help clients regain the initiative in a complex situation, while limiting the impact on the day-to-day operations of the business.
Frequently Asked Questions
My business partner has shut me out of company decisions, what are my legal options?
If you are a shareholder and the following situations are starting to arise:
You are no longer notified of meetings
You cannot access company financial information
You are being shut out of important operational decisions
You were originally involved in management, but are now being gradually sidelined
The arrangement of profits is clearly unfair to you
then this may not just be a deteriorating relationship
It may already be affecting your rights as a shareholder. Under Australian corporations law, minority shareholders may, in certain circumstances, be entitled to relief, particularly where the affairs of the company are being conducted in a manner that is oppressive, unfairly prejudicial or discriminatory. NS Legal can review the company constitution, the shareholders’ agreement and the current arrangements in practice, and assess the legal and commercial options available to you.
The other shareholders and I cannot agree on anything, and the company cannot make any decisions. What now?
This is a very typical shareholder dispute scenario in small and mid-sized businesses. Common features include:
The shareholdings are close, sometimes split 50/50;
The parties cannot agree on whether to distribute dividends;
There are fundamental disagreements on whether to keep investing, expand or sell the business;
The company is at a standstill because of internal deadlock.
Where the company documents do not provide a clear deadlock resolution mechanism, the issue generally does not resolve itself, it tends to keep deteriorating. Different matters may suit different approaches, for example:
Negotiating an adjustment to the cooperation structure;
Arranging for a shareholder to exit;
Negotiating a buy-out;
Mediation;
Where required, pursuing a resolution through legal process.
NS Legal can take your company structure and commercial objectives into account and help identify a more realistic, implementable resolution.
I want to exit the company, but the other shareholders will not buy my shares. What can I do?
This is very common in shareholder disputes. Many clients initially assume that “as a shareholder, I can simply leave whenever I want”. In practice, however, whether exit can actually be achieved usually depends on:
Whether a shareholders’ agreement has been signed;
What the company constitution provides;
Whether there is a buy-out mechanism;
How the shares are to be valued;
Whether a third-party purchaser may be available;
Whether the dispute itself has already affected the value of the company or the shares.
Some matters can be resolved through negotiation; others require a more formal legal process. NS Legal can help clients assess the available exit paths, share value and the more reliable commercial strategy.
Does a shareholder dispute have to end up in court?
Not necessarily. Most shareholder disputes do not in fact run to a full trial. Many matters are resolved through approaches such as:
Lawyer-led negotiation;
Commercial negotiation;
Mediation;
Restructuring of shareholdings;
Buy-out or exit arrangements.
The courts can of course grant legal remedies, but shareholder disputes are not simply about whether you can “win in court”. They also need to consider:
Time;
Legal costs;
The impact on the day-to-day running of the company;
Whether the value of the business may be further damaged.
In shareholder dispute work, NS Legal does not push every matter into litigation as a matter of course. We work with the client’s commercial objectives in mind, and select the more reasonable and more strategically advantageous resolution path.
Need legal advice? Talk to NS Legal
We give clear, practical advice that helps you make sounder decisions in complex situations.
