
The
Court of Appeal
gave judgment last Friday in
Dold v Murphy [2020] NZCA 313: see
here
(
pdf). The decision is of note because of the discussion it contains concerning the circumstances in which a shareholder (or shareholders) would owe fiduciary duties to each other. The President stated (at para. [59]):
... the proposition that shareholders owe fiduciary duties generally to one
another would represent a surprising development, and one we think contrary to
principle. With certain statutory exceptions — most notably relief against
oppression under s 174 of the Companies Act 1993 — shareholders are entitled to
act selfishly in their dealings with one another. That is the antithesis of
fiduciary obligation. The fact that one shareholder’s actions may diminish the
value of another’s shareholding does not mean there is a fiduciary obligation:
impact on another’s worth is not enough ... The shareholder-shareholder relationship is not inherently fiduciary".
No comments:
Post a Comment