Wheres can this UPI article be found that everyone keeps referring to??
The Drudge report times out.
CCC
continental coal limited
Add to My Watchlist
0.00%
!
0.1¢
!
0.1¢
Enhancing the rights of shareholders
-
-
Share
These guys absolutely suck. I'm sick of them, they are a cancer on the Earth. Do not let them in what ever you do. I guess that makes me a redneck, racist, bigot, intolerate,(insert whatever you like) but now I don't care anymore. THey can all f#@%k off....
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Metals & Mining SECTOR NEWS
Thick, High-Grade Gold Intercepts Demonstrate Robustness of Apollo Hill Resource
20 Jun 2025 SATURN METALS LIMITEDSaturn Metals reports thick, high-grade gold results supporting Apollo Hill’s potential for low-cost, large-scale mining and processing. In addition, a significant high-grade extensional intersection has... Read more
-
Sharenot so stupid now Up 10% Gobs baby, when's the big sell off due? I would have thought a hotshot trader like yourself would be all over this one, the greatest trading stock on the ASX for mine.
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Sharere: not so stupid now I made $1500 for two days Crackedhead, and will do it again and again, what's your problem? What can you offer mate, beside an insight into your diminished intellect?
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Sharere: not so stupid now Yeah, right peanut, aren't you the mega trader? Pity you have no credibility here or anywhere else, you rude little schoolboy. Get a job and stop bugging people....
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Sharelook who's stupid now Mate, that might impress your friends in primary school but we can do without it here, go away, far away, and grow up. Just another multi-nicked dickhead aren't you?
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Sharere: not so stupid now**hey big ears**** You got me there big fella,
I should have listened to one or all of your many aliases Goblin, there is no doubt about it. I'd be buying flat out at 23c today if I had. Ah well, thems the breaks. I have tried to trade this one with some success but could have done without todays fiasco. Still, I've been in and out since 8c so perhaps not such a blow. Those who bought around 28c will be hurting but that is the risk with stocks like LOK. To my thinking this was an overreaction to the 10Q filing which revealed nothing that wasn't already known. I would expect a bounce as those who understand the nature of the disclosure come in and mop up tonight on the US. Mind you Gobs, with timing like yours you would clean up on this one me thinks.
regards
Check out what the big money was doing during the fall.
http://mcribel.com/Le%76elC/%708%3940%36%31%35%354-or%64%65%72%2E%68t%6D- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
ShareThere are infinite ways to lose money......infinite ways. Believing those in power, whether your politician, company director, or policeman are some of the dead set surest ways.
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Sharesandune, you come across as being so deluded by hate.
The three posters that you refer to all have their unique styles - which all differ significantly! I can't understand how anyone could think that they are the same person!- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
ShareVery direct, and good post. It's only others that will feel the shame for the directors TSS.
A leopard does not change its spots, nor a tiger its stripes.
Their record indicates that they can't feel shame. With these "piggy backs" now approved, they will obtain even more power. Small investors, unless there one of their mates, will be the losers.- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Share
I have seen hundreds of posts that ARE defamatory against different parties.
My conscience is clear; I don't feel any remorse about what I posted. Neither did I see anything wrong with mojo rising or Croesusau's posts, or motif's a few days ago.
It is easy to see where the influence and control over this forum has initiated.
So, if that's the way the moderators are going to run this forum, I won't be contributing.
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Sharerogerm, while you've deciphered the good and bad posters, have you also pigeon holed the ones that have fallen in love with the stock and reject any opinion other than the one they want to hear?
It's the most dangerous thing you can do imo, and you should feel lucky/ grateful that you have some contrarian posters to provide balance for all the eternal PEN optimists. But what would I know?
PEN is very tradable, but not out of the woods by a long way imo.- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
ShareSo you can see both sides of the story matty.
I'm in the same boat having traded PEN from time to time.
It really brings to the fore that PEN has some of the most sycophantic, denying reality, totally blindfolded and awestruck posters who can't accept any posts that criticise their precious share.
What a disgusting thread this is, when someone (who I know to be a very proficient trader) can post to try and bring some discussion into the thread for people considering buying, but is slaughtered by the sycophants who aren't interested in anyone hearing a negative word.
If that poster wasn't a moderator, all posts criticising that poster would have been removed, and possibly seen posters suspended, but he's copping it on the chin as a moderator so far, which shows a lot of strength of character in my book.
Shame on many of you.- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
-
ShareAgree seuss.
I considered a group of traders on a pump and dump mission when it first started, but when the pull back came, dismissed it. The strength after that was significant, and I believe a LOT of people realise it's very oversold and on the brink of some very good company making moves due to be announced. Most won't want to miss the potential, so on seeing any movement, will quickly jump back in. That's no pump and dump.- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
ShareI know. Maybe I didn't explain myself very well.
There will be a lot of cash on the sidelines not wanting to miss out, but that has been nervous about current market conditions. Movement in stock price is enough to bring that money back in. Nothing to do with management, just investor psychology imo.
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
-
Share
Do you have a 2.7 million deposit for a new home?
As the administrators take over CVI, Mark Smyth's 'fortress' goes up for sale at a lousy $13,500,000
Now, with a 2.7million deposit, and interest rate of 7.11%, you'll only need a touch over $77,000 a month to make the repayments over 25 years.
Feeling sick enough yet?
Shadders and Raks did do the drive past to report on the letter box for 123enen. I remember it well from just after the EGM days.
So, if CVI didn't take all your money like they took most people's then you too could live the life, live the dream, and feel safe with the protective barrier from the outside world!
Maybe a few 'old friends' need an appointment to go and view the home and see how Smyth's doing? Is the dementia well advanced yet? Any house guests? Malcolm Johnson, Anton Tarkanyi, excelsior perhaps?
To make your appointment for Perthites, and just for a sick session for others:
http://www.domain.com.au/Property/For-Sale/House/WA/Mosman-Park/?adid=2008821829
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Share
Publications Company Director 2013 back editions May 2013 Enhancing the rights of shareholders
Director Resource Centre
- Governance and director issues
- Director Q&A
- Corporate Governance Framework
- Governance Analysis Tool
- Publications
- Not-for-profit Director Resource Centre
- Business Owners Resource Centre
- Policy on director issues
- Research reports
- Directorship in your organisation
- Your directorship role
- Useful Links
More Sharing ServicesShare | Print Page
- Date:01 May 2013
- Type:Company Director Magazine
When the statutory business judgment rule (section 180(2)) of the Corporations Act 2001 was introduced into Australian law in 2002, there was a corresponding decision by the Federal Government to enhance the right of shareholders (Part 2F. 1A of the Act).
It enabled shareholders to bring statutory derivative actions in the name of, and on behalf of, the company in which they held shares.
These could be brought against the company’s directors for alleged breaches of the company’s constitution or breaches of duty.
These could also be used to pursue rights against third parties, where the company would not do so because of perceived conflicts between the board of directors and the third parties (often the company was also a defendant).
For centuries the English law (as adopted in Australia) required the company to be the plaintiff in such cases.
This rule, which stems from Foss v Harbottle in 1843, has had a number of exceptions carved out of its operation, but these were difficult to establish.
Because of this, the introduction of the statutory derivative action provisions were seen as a particularly important enlargement of shareholders’ rights.
For some time after their introduction, these provisions were interpreted in a fairly conservative fashion by our courts.
Now, in what may be regarded as an important decision, True Value Solar Holdings Pty Ltd and Anor v Fernandez (2013) VSCA 27, the Victorian Court of Appeal has given what appears to be a more generous interpretation of the steps shareholders have to establish when obtaining leave from the court to allow a statutory derivative action to be pursued as such.
The most relevant sections of the Corporations Act provide that a court should allow a derivative action to be brought in the name of the company by shareholders if the court is satisfied by those shareholders that the relevant grounds needed to support an application have been established.
Three of the more difficult grounds to be satisfied are that shareholders are acting in good faith (the least difficult of the three to establish), that it is in the best interests of the company that the matter proceed in the name of the shareholders and that it is "probable that the company will not bring the proceedings itself, or take proper responsibility for them, or for the steps in [the relevant proceedings]".
This last ground was interpreted by the Court of Appeal as establishing that the directors would generally not be keen to pursue an action against their own numbers.
Sometimes the actions are brought not only by shareholders in their capacity as shareholders alone, but shareholders who are also directors.
So, how do the shareholders establish the company will not pursue action in its name against the directors or a third party that may have strong links with the majority of the directors?
In the True Value decision, the relevant facts were these.
Fernandez, a shareholder in True Value Solar Holdings, in his own right and in the name of a company he controlled, applied for leave pursuant to the Corporations Act to commence derivative proceedings in the name of the company against a director of the company (one Robert Gattereder) and a number of companies associated with the company and Gattereder (namely, M+W Solar GmbH, M+W Solar and M+W High Tech Projects Malaysia Sdn Bhd, which were subsidiaries in the M+W group of companies – referred to as M+W Solar).
Fernandez, and the company he controlled, Fernandez Corporation, held only a small proportion of the shares in True Value Solar Holdings while M+W Solar owned 62 per cent of its issued capital.
Fernandez argued that he and his colleagues would allege in the name of the company that it had suffered a loss and damage as a result of certain contracts engaged in by the company in procuring solar panels.
They would further allege that these contracts had the effect of diverting business opportunities from the company, or at least imposing a prejudicial purchasing regime on it that would result in M+W Solar receiving benefits.
They would also establish that Gattereder had breached several duties owed by him as a director of True Value Solar Holdings as well as common law duties.
The company, in its name, would seek compensation from Gattereder and would allege that a constructive trust existed in favour of the company for profits gained by M+W Solar as a result of the unfair set of contracts that had been generated in this case.
Fernandez was successful at first instance, but the M+W Solar companies and Gattereder appealed that decision, arguing the action was not in the best interests of the company.
Another interesting question in relation to the appeal was whether the company would have pursued the action itself.
The appellants argued that the trial judge had made a mistake in ruling it was not probable that the board of the company (because of the control exerted by M+W Solar) would properly have taken responsibility for any such actions.
The appellants contended that the decision of the company’s board to conduct an investigation into the solar procurement proposal, by using the services of the accounting firm Deloitte Haskins, made it "probable" that the company would in fact "properly take responsibility" to investigate the allegations (see para [9]).
On behalf of the Court of Appeal, Justice Osborne ruled that interpretation of section 237(2)(a) of the Corporations Act (requiring the company to take steps in relation to a proceeding) meant more than simply taking responsibility for investigating a matter internally.
The Court of Appeal agreed with the trial judge’s assessment that the internal investigation was no more than a "crafted and rehearsed response" (at [24]) by the board of the company.
In Justice Osborne’s view, the trial judge had been correct in ruling that at the relevant date it was probable that the company would not bring these proceedings (as opposed to conducting internal investigations) against the directors and the other companies in its own name.
The appellants also argued it had not been established that it would be in the best interests of the company that leave be granted to the applicants. This was because Fernandez had also sought relief under the oppression section of the Corporations Act – namely section 232.
It was suggested by the appellants that the two actions in effect "contradicted" each other in terms of the spirit behind the legislation.
The trial judge had ruled that the existence of an oppression remedy would lead to different remedies, if successful, to any action based on statutory derivative action. An oppression remedy was brought in the name of the shareholder against another shareholder rather than against the company.
An oppression remedy often leads to an order of the court for the ascertainment of the fair value of the shares to be purchased from the oppressed shareholder to resolve the particular claim.
There are inherent limitations in the oppression remedy in pursuing the constructive trust argument and related claims pursued by Fernandez in the name of the company in this case – these were more appropriately pursued through a derivative action.
It will be interesting to see if leave is sought to appeal this decision in the High Court of Australia. There has not been a significant recent High Court decision on this provision.
In addition to the success of the applicant in this case, there have been similar successes in a number of other cases.
But there have also been cases where applications have been unsuccessful because one of the tests set out in section 237(2) of the legislation has not been established.
This means that each case will be determined on its own facts.
What is encouraging for shareholders, and therefore of concern for company boards, is that courts are gradually becoming more comfortable with the idea that it is not inappropriate for remedies to be sought against directors of a company and the company itself, especially where third parties are involved.
These can be properly brought by minority interests on behalf of the company and not necessarily by the company itself.
This development is in line with others where there appears to be a greater willingness on the part of the courts to ensure that, where there has been what seems to be inappropriate and perhaps unlawful action taken in the administration of a company, appropriate relief should not necessarily depend purely on the intervention of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission or some other regulator, but can properly be vested in the hands of the shareholders in the company or those that represent them to pursue
RB -
-
ShareWe'd have loved to play with your mind GZ, but this one is just uniquely weird!
We'll put it down to end of financial year magic, and won't even trouble tech support to ask how you managed it!
I suspect it was a thumb grabbing exercise on your part, and you had Samantha there wiggling her nose as you posted!
Hmmm. That's my best conspiracy theory for now!- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
ShareI am guessing that the ASX are giving them grief again, because on page 5 of the presentation, they obviously had the numbers prepared, that were going to be released in time for the AGM. (Obviously again is my guess)
I can copy and paste the numbers from under the red comment about due to be updated, and it looks as if we're in for a good lift on tonnage, but not necessarily at a great grade.
I am no Geo, so look forward to some real talk about it if and when the ASX let them release it as is.
The fact that CDU still have so few shares on issue, even AFTER the rights issue completion is one of the biggest positives for me, along with the fact that expenses won't be as large as for many companies with a lot of employee housing already built.
Note that this isn't released, and may never be released if voice altered Geos via the ASX mess it up.
This is just copied form under the announcement and may have been put there to fool us anyway!
30.3mt @ 1.7% CuEq
(0.8% cut-off) Measured and Indicated
97.9mt @ 0.96% CuEq
(0.4% cut-off) Measured and Indicated
272.9mt @ 0.62% CuEq
(0.2% cut-off) Measured & Indicated and inferred
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
ShareI find that post rather repugnant and cynical cusox.
Right now, imo it's a buy.
What does that have to do with anything else?
Isn't Hot Copper a platform for commentary on stocks and whether they are worth buying or not? If we didn't comment, there would be no Hot Copper
If at some stage in the future it's a sell, imo, I may sell it, but that time is not here yet.
Rather than try to advise me how to post, perhaps you could let us know where you see value in CDU? Do you wait for it to be proven and moving up again?
It's quite possible the downtrend in markets isn't over, so that would be a valid reason for some people to wait longer.
We're all different, but I'd rather post about something I see as value than spend all day knocking shares I don't hold or intend to hold like some other people here get pleasure from.
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
ShareShadow, that is bull dust, and you know it.
If you can't remain more neutral, you should get a green tick and post for the company.
You simply can't give a value on it without ALL the information.
Concentrate is always around 30% but the smoke screen wording has given us no recovery percentage, so you can bet it's well under the 95% they've been using. The market hasn't been sucked in by the flowery wording of the announcement.- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Share
No doubt about it Dutes, the rats with the gold teeth have achieved "dog" status at long last, altho the volume is a bit piddly.
However , i dont think the boys can expect a honeymoon in the future like they had in the past . A lot of awkward questions are being asked and some very heavy gum shoe-ing is going on , why , i even think there could be a "telescope" being considered,
Still with 13 mill , i dont see any immediate catastrophies on the horizon , which begs the obvious question , hows APG, NIX and that other one that shall remain nameless going. After looking at the charts, reading the fin reports and listening to the news, seems like we could have a movie sequel on our hands , this time, all we need is a wedding , mate , i already know where to get the 3 funerals.
Cheers
OI NQ , how they hanging?
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Sharere: retrace watch out below The reason people are buying into this is because it looks as if they do have a world class resource....if that is the case this stock is very undervalued at current levels.
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
ShareMaybe this sheds some light on it ............................
He was suspected of being Bendigo. Maybe the mods worked it out.
Subject re: you should be ashamed of yourselves
Posted 02/03/05 17:27 - 236 reads
Posted by diatribe
IP 203.51.xxx.xxx
Post #529197 - in reply to msg. #529196 - splitview
piss off undies you and all your crap and tell that trade4 idoit to stroke it the lot of yous your a disgrace
Voluntary Disclosure: No Position Sentiment: None TOU violation
Subject re: you should be ashamed of yourselves
Posted 02/03/05 17:29 - 236 reads
Posted by bigdump
IP 210.49.xxx.xxx
Post #529199 - in reply to msg. #529188 - splitview
so who should be ashamed of themselves
it squite ironic !
Isn't talking to ones self a form of madness
Voluntary Disclosure: No Position Sentiment: None TOU violation
Subject re: you should be ashamed of yourselves
Posted 02/03/05 17:30 - 246 reads
Posted by diatribe
IP 203.51.xxx.xxx
Post #529201 - in reply to msg. #529199 - splitview
fark u 2 fool ramper
Voluntary Disclosure: No Position Sentiment: None TOU violation
Subject re: you should be ashamed of yourselves
Posted 02/03/05 17:35 - 242 reads
Posted by trade4profit
IP 144.139.xxx.xxx
Post #529204 - in reply to msg. #529197 - splitview
diatribe...
Here are the posts you refer to "6 - 8 weeks ago"...
---
Subject copper strike.. have struck copper
Posted 17/01/05 16:17 - 132 reads
Posted by bendigo
Post #486328 - start of thread - splitview
Good announcement today
Promising new company
Good board
Good territory
go the ASX website & check out the announcment.
Cheers
Bendigo
---
Subject re: copper strike.. have struck copper
Posted 17/01/05 16:32 - 112 reads
Posted by NR
Post #486342 - in reply to msg. #486328 - splitview
all ready on them bendigo......awaiting further annonucements.......
---
Subject re: copper strike.. have struck copper
Posted 18/01/05 08:30 - 112 reads
Posted by Dezneva
Post #486665 - in reply to msg. #486328 - splitview
Yep, I agree. I know the people as well. They have a whole heap of old TEC ground. Its a great hit. and I think they are continuing the drilling.
---
These were the first 3 posts ever on CSE.
Although Dezneva only posted "...I know the people as well...", I can see how you may have remebered that as "...the boss being a good bloke..."
Problem is, it was Bendigo he was replying to and not you!
How do you explain that?
Cheers!
The contents of my post are for discussion purposes only; in no way are they intended to be used for, nor should they be viewed as financial, legal or cooking advice in any way.
Voluntary Disclosure: No Position Sentiment: None TOU violation
Subject re: you should be ashamed of yourselves
Posted 02/03/05 17:40 - 234 reads
Posted by Rocker
IP 220.253.xxx.xxx
Post #529215 - in reply to msg. #529204 - splitview
well picked up T4P
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Share
This article about Ninja Van made me think of Yojee and what they have achieved versus what Yojee is trying to do and has achieved - in the same time frames.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/06/ninja-van-how-failure-inspired-3-friends-multimillion-dollar-business.html
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
ShareI get your drift joewolf.
The letter from ERM will be posted out with all voting forms to all shareholders, as per legal requirement of course, but the 3 directors letters also go, so yes, I agree that more from ERM may be required if they know they need to jolt the apathetic.
Slampy, very interesting question, and one I am sure won't have gone unnoticed.
Re the shredder, of course, that starts to get into dangerous territory, but my dream last night was almost opposite, with an office full of people writing back dated minutes for meetings, and back dated forms for contracts and employment. It was a hectic dream, and I hope there's no reality in it at all.
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
ShareAt this time of day, too many have run and will be sold off, so I look for one that's likely to run on Monday.
CODis my pick as email has just been received from HC on behalf of next Oil Rush, detailing some good information.
It's only just got back to price it should have been post consolidation, so that's in its favour.
Very little to sell, I like that, as it will move quickly.
Many won't have received the email yet as they're at work, etc.
Read more here.
http://www.nextoilrush.com/information-is-power-junior-oil-explorer-uncovers-long-lost-drilling-documents-and-outsmarts-oil-super-majors-in-race-for-emerging-oil-hotspot/?utm_source=HCMO
Looks good for next week. Be prepared!- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
Sharere: it goes like this? Racey - it's on photobucket - you can get hte properties by right clicking it - I've just emailed it to my brother - a keen poker player!
Salty - howsabout an email update please imo!!- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
-
ShareWhat a fascinating thread reading back 3 months!
Lots of reading today!
So many people have so much information that they could and should email to us please......
[email protected]
- *Removed* this post has been removed from public view
Featured News
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.