Project thunder shareholder liquidating trust

The parties disagreed from the outset on important corporate decisions and Arcay's response to matters relating to performance and accountability.There were complaints from disgruntled clients concerning the services rendered by the company.

The obstructive conduct of both sides did little to help the situation.

In other words, the appellants' nominees and the respondents' nominees each had 50% of the vote at both board and management level.

The shareholders appointed directors who vote in blocks in proportion to their shareholding.

Apco was to refer clients' work required to be performed on the African continent to the company.

The residual profit generated by the company was to be shared on an equal footing while the directors seconded by Arcay were to manage the affairs of the company.

Search for project thunder shareholder liquidating trust:

project thunder shareholder liquidating trust-55project thunder shareholder liquidating trust-56project thunder shareholder liquidating trust-44

The answer to this question emerges from certain principles distilled from the cases which have considered the just and equitable ground since The ground is usually applied in four situations: (1) where there has been a disappearance of substratum; (2) where there exists justifiable lack of confidence among members; (3) where, in practical terms, the relationship resembles that of a partnership and lacks the protection of a more formal corporate structure; and (4) where the parties are deadlocked.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

One thought on “project thunder shareholder liquidating trust”