Threatening to sack a board for poor performance etc. happens everyday and is part of corporate life in public companies, but where you threaten to roll a board if they don't do a specific act, such as drilling, is where the question of oppressive behaviour comes to play
So again, following your logic, the act of the board in terminating JH, in part because he did not sign a pre-written letter in the form they demanded,(a specific act) and taking the 14 days he was entitled to to seek legal advice is oppressive behaviour on the part of the board. I don't hear you railing against that conduct.
BTW, are you claiming some sort of legal qualification to base your interpretation of S.232(e)? "I fully understand Corporate Law having lived it for the last 20+ years" and "I'm qualified to draw these conclusions.."
CTP Price at posting:
45.0¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
