Cordiant Communications (Australia) Pty Ltd v The Communications Group Holdings Pty Ltd [2005] NSWSC 1005

Cordiant Communications (Australia) Pty Ltd v The Communications Group Holdings Pty Ltd [2005] NSWSC 1005

The statutory rights to appoint a representative (s.250D) and to vote (s.249Y(3)) at general meetings may be contractually limited between shareholders but, for the purposes of company affairs and meetings, such contracts do not override the statutory regime; thus Cordiant had a right to attend and vote all its...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Plaintiff: Cordiant Communications (Australia) Pty Ltd; Defendant: The Communications Group Holdings Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Special Resolution declared invalid; injunction to issue restraining further breach of Shareholders Agreement by Cordiant; Power of Attorney remains valid; further meeting to be convened.
Legal Topics
Shareholder Rights, Proxies at General Meetings, Powers of Attorney, Shareholders Agreements, Statutory Voting Rights, Injunctions, Financial Assistance by Companies
Corporations Law Equity Contract Law Shareholder Rights Proxies at General Meetings Powers of Attorney Shareholders Agreements Statutory Voting Rights +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 47 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cordiant Communications (Australia) Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

The Communications Group Holdings Pty Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an irrevocable Power of Attorney can operate as a valid proxy for shareholder voting under the Corporations Act and company constitution
  2. 2 Whether the Power of Attorney as proxy was validly executed and validly contained the company's name
  3. 3 Whether Cordiant was entitled to vote all its shares by attending the meeting in person/through representative despite the Power of Attorney

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory rights to appoint a representative (s.250D) and to vote (s.249Y(3)) at general meetings may be contractually limited between shareholders but, for the purposes of company affairs and meetings, such contracts do not override the statutory regime; thus Cordiant had a right to attend and vote all its shares at the meeting, suspending powers given by the Power of Attorney, and the chairman's contrary ruling constituted a substantive irregularity, invalidating the Special Resolution, though Cordiant's breach of contract may be subject to injunctive restraint in future meetings.

Court Disposition

Special Resolution declared invalid; injunction to issue restraining further breach of Shareholders Agreement by Cordiant; Power of Attorney remains valid; further meeting to be convened.

Orders

  • Declaration that the Special Resolution was invalidly passed at the 18 November 2004 meeting.
  • Cordiant restrained from further breaches of clause 16.9 of the Shareholders Agreement (lodging proxy/making appointment under CA s.250D in respect of Attorney Shares while Power of Attorney remains valid, except as permitted by clause 16.9(d)).