Answer explanation says derivative action and I had written oppression
Minority shareholder, directors doing something she says has damaged the business. I went straight to oppression because she is clearly a complainant and clearly unhappy. Explanation says leave to bring an action in the name of the corporation. What distinguishes them?
8 replies
Ask whose money went missing. Hers, or the company's.
Best answer
That question settles it, and it is worth slowing down on.
Oppression is personal. Something was done to her, in a way that treats her interests as not mattering, and she sues in her own name for her own loss.
A derivative action is the opposite shape. The harm landed on the corporation, the corporation is the one with the claim, and she is asking a court for permission to run that claim because the people who would normally decide are the people who caused it.
Your pattern said damaged the business. Business, not her. Once you read for who absorbed the loss these stop being confusable.
I read damaged the business and still somehow answered as if it said damaged her. thank you.
can it ever be both
In practice yes and pleadings often carry both. On an exam the facts are usually built to point one way, so pick the one the loss belongs to rather than hedging.
The permission step is the other giveaway. Nobody needs a court's blessing to complain about something done to them. Needing leave tells you the claim was never hers to start with.
that is a cleaner tell than mine honestly
whose loss is it, one line, front of the business tab. done
Sign in to take part in this discussion. If you have purchased an examination from us, you already have an account.