We all know that legal disputes can be costly...this includes: 'Business Partnership Break Ups'
We all know that legal disputes can be costly…THIS INCLUDES:
‘Business Partnership Break Ups’
Here is my list of the TOP 6 issues to consider:
Firstly, the typical term used by many is a ‘partnership break up’ BUT these are actually more commonly:
“Shareholder Disputes” being a dispute between shareholders in a corporation.
A true “Partnership” under the Partnership Act 1958 (Vic) dispute can occur too but a different set of rules apply.
Firstly, the Partnership Act 1958 (Vic) does have mechanisms to dissolve a partnership and deals with rights and distribution of certain assets and profits…
Secondly, the majority of disputes are shareholder disputes in proprietary limited companies and the Corporations Act has so many applicable sections on various issues.
Many of us purchase directors’ and officers’ liability insurance or management liability. In fact, for many years I was an expert in this field with Marsh and Aon.
NOWADAYS, I routinely deal with shareholder disputes and D&O is not far away.
Whether insurance applies will often come down to 3 key things:
(A) Wrongful act: Whether a wrongful act has occurred (say a breach of director duty); and
(B) Insured persons: Under D&O an insured person is a director or officer and even employee but whether the party sued / committed a wrongful act is an insured person is KEY; and
(C) Excluded: Exclusions apply like a major shareholder exclusion or insured vs insured.
BTW, policy holders should get their insurance reviewed by an experienced D&O lawyer NOW not when things TURN UPSIDE down!
WOW! If you know me, oppressive conduct is something I am talking about a lot. But here I want to mention something different about oppression…
A typical remedy for resolving oppression claims is in fact a buy back of the shares of the oppressed party and by the other shareholders, directors or company. Ie. removing them from the company.
In fact, the standard orders at the Supreme Court seek an independent valuation early in the process which critically allows a calculation and resolution to occur. So even if insurance is in play the typical remedy is not insured - ie the purchase of said shares.
WOW this is a big one. Often I see shareholders without an agreement, without a method to value the company. So, things are up in the air.
Even when there is an agreement there can still be complications but this documents and key foundation documents like the constitution and replaceable rules are critical.
The Corporations Act has various powers to even minority members to call meetings and demand financial and other reports. This can be a thorn in the side of the majority…
This article is a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
A building professional who can write a report and a building professional who can defend one under cross-examination at VCAT are rarely the same person, and the gap between them is costing property owners claims.
If water from a neighbouring property has damaged your home or investment property in Victoria, section 16 of the Water Act 1989 gives you a direct path to recovery, but only if you can prove exactly where the flow came from and why it was unreasonable.
When a property damage claim moves toward recovery, the tradesperson who fixed the problem and the expert who can prove liability in court are rarely the same person.
AFCA serves a purpose for small insurance disputes, but once claims grow past $100,000, its no-costs model and relaxed evidence standards tilt the process toward insurers in ways most policyholders never realise.