21 May 2021
NG TAI JOO v. THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES AND OTHERS
- Citation
- [2021] HKCFI 1510
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMP356/2021
Clause 3.1 is properly construed as a representation clause securing the plaintiff a board representative but not a contractual right that fetters the statutory right of a majority shareholder to remove directors; the irregularity principle applies because the majority (Dama) could and would inevitably have regularised the contested decisions, so the originating summonses fail and must be dismissed (subsidiary follows because the holding company could control it).