Navigating the complex world of corporate law can be overwhelming, especially when it comes to understanding legal actions such as derivative action. This comprehensive guide will provide you with the knowledge and insights necessary to grasp the concept, legal process, and real-life implications of derivative action. So let’s dive in and explore this fascinating topic.
Short Summary
- Derivative actions are legal claims brought by shareholders on behalf of a company to protect the public from corporate misconduct.
- The process involves written demand, representative plaintiffs and court involvement to ensure adequate representation in best interests of the corporation.
- Successful derivative actions can lead to positive outcomes for corporations and its shareholders, while unsuccessful ones serve as a reminder of importance in adhering to legal procedures.
What is a Derivative Action?
Derivative actions play a crucial role in the realm of corporate law, serving as a means for shareholders to hold officers or directors accountable for alleged misconduct or mismanagement, all in the name of the corporation. The purpose of such actions is to prevent certain actions by defendants and confer jurisdiction to the court, ensuring that the alleged misconduct is addressed.
When shareholders initiate a derivative suit, they do so because they believe that the board of directors has not taken appropriate action to address alleged misconduct. It’s essential to understand that a derivative action aims to protect the interests of the corporation and, indirectly, the shareholders.
The shareholders, along with other shareholders, may benefit from a successful outcome, such as an increase in the corporation’s share prices, which can result in higher dividends.
Shareholder Derivative Action
A shareholder derivative action is a legal claim brought forth by one or more shareholders of a company, acting as representative plaintiffs on behalf of the corporation. The plaintiff in a derivative suit must possess a justifiable cause of action that has not been acted upon, and any damages resulting from the suit are to be awarded to the corporation instead of the shareholder.
Such actions are of great importance because they safeguard the interests of those who have invested in companies while detecting any fraudulent or unlawful activities at large businesses. This ultimately serves to protect the public from any untoward corporate actions. Examples of behavior that could lead to a shareholder derivative action include financial fraud, embezzlement, insider trading, and breach of fiduciary duty.
Derivative Suit vs. Direct Suit
A derivative suit is a legal action initiated by a shareholder or group of shareholders on behalf of a corporation against the corporation’s directors, officers, or other third parties who have breached their duties. It’s crucial to distinguish between a derivative suit and a direct suit. While a derivative suit pertains to a wrong committed against the corporation, a direct suit pertains to a wrong inflicted upon an individual shareholder.
In essence, the main difference between a shareholder derivative suit and a direct suit lies in the nature of the claim. A shareholder derivative suit involves the shareholder acting on behalf of the corporation, whereas a direct suit involves the shareholder taking action against the corporation for a personal claim.
The Legal Process of a Derivative Action
The legal process of a derivative action consists of several key components: a written demand, representative plaintiffs, and court involvement to file suit.
In the following subsections, we will delve deeper into each of these elements and their relevance in the context of a derivative action.
Written Demand
A written demand is a formal request mandated by a shareholder to the board of directors to take legal action on behalf of the company before a shareholder initiates a derivative action. The requirements for a written demand vary by jurisdiction, but generally include a comprehensive elucidation of the facts and circumstances of the purported wrongdoings, a demand for the board to take action, and a declaration that the shareholder is prepared to bring a derivative action if the board does not take action.
Neglecting to submit a written demand may result in the court dismissing the derivative action and potentially imposing sanctions on the shareholder, including requiring the shareholder to pay the corporation’s legal fees. Cases like In re Oracle Corp. Derivative Litigation and In re Apple Inc. Derivative Litigation showcase the importance of submitting a written demand, as shareholders successfully demanded that the board investigate and take action against the company’s CEO for alleged misconduct and mismanagement.
Representative Plaintiffs
In a derivative action, representative plaintiffs are individual shareholders who institute legal proceedings against a third party, such as an executive officer or director, on behalf of a corporation. The representative plaintiff is indirectly rewarded as a shareholder from any resulting recompense obtained on behalf of the corporation.
These representative plaintiffs play a vital role in holding the culpable parties accountable and obtaining reparation on behalf of the corporation. By representing the corporation and initiating legal action, they ensure that the interests of the corporation and its shareholders are protected and that justice is served.
Court Involvement
The court plays a significant role in the derivative action process. It possesses inherent power to facilitate the conduct of proceedings, including the power to dictate the course of the proceedings and mandate that any pertinent notice be provided to shareholders or members. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1 is the legal reference that defines derivative actions in federal court. It serves as the governing rule for such actions.
Moreover, the court must grant its approval for the dismissal or compromise of the derivative action, and notice of the proposed dismissal or compromise must be provided to shareholders or members in accordance with the court’s directives. This involvement ensures that the legal process is carried out fairly and in the best interests of all parties involved.
Requirements for Adequate Representation
In a derivative action, the plaintiff must fairly and adequately represent the interests of shareholders or members similarly situated in enforcing the right of the corporation or association. This involves acting in the best interests of the corporation and allowing for a reasonable time to take action.
In the following subsections, we will explore these requirements in more depth.
Best Interests
The primary interests of a plaintiff in a derivative action involve pursuing a resolution for damage inflicted upon the corporation and guaranteeing that the corporation is safeguarded from potential harm. This is typically accomplished by holding the culpable parties accountable and obtaining reparation on behalf of the corporation.
The court plays a vital role in ensuring that the plaintiff acts in the best interests of the corporation. When the court directs, the most qualified directors, who have no material interest in the derivative suit, should objectively assess if the derivative proceeding is beneficial for the corporation. If not, it’s reasonable to dismiss the derivative proceeding.
Reasonable Time
A reasonable time for a plaintiff in a derivative action may vary depending on factors such as the complexity of the case, the jurisdiction where the case is being heard, and the availability of resources. There is no definitive answer to what is considered a reasonable time for a plaintiff in a derivative action, as it may vary according to the particular case and jurisdiction.
For example, in certain jurisdictions, a plaintiff might have up to two years to file a derivative action. In other jurisdictions, the time limit may be more or less extensive. Understanding the concept of reasonable time is crucial to ensure that the plaintiff takes timely and appropriate action in a derivative suit.
Potential Consequences of Plaintiff’s Failure
If a plaintiff’s lawsuit is dismissed due to the court determining that the plaintiff did not provide a sufficient pre-suit demand, then the plaintiff has not met the essential criterion for initiating a derivative action. Furthermore, any damages or other proceeds acquired through a successful shareholder derivative lawsuit are kept by the corporation, rather than the shareholder who commenced the suit.
In the following subsections, we will discuss the potential consequences of plaintiff’s failure in more detail.
Dismissal of the Suit
The implications of dismissal of a derivative action may vary depending on the rationale for dismissal. Generally, the dismissal will be without prejudice, affording the plaintiff a chance to alter the complaint. The court’s endorsement may be necessary for the dismissal, and the plaintiff may not be able to dispose of the rights of the corporation without the approval of the board of directors.
The effect of dismissal on the rights of the corporation will be contingent upon the rationale for dismissal and the court’s sanction. It is crucial for the plaintiff to understand the implications of dismissal and take necessary steps to avoid such an outcome, as it may negatively impact the corporation and its shareholders.
Impact on Corporate Assets
In a successful shareholder derivative lawsuit, any damages or other proceeds collected are retained by the corporation, thus potentially influencing the value of the corporation’s assets. However, should the plaintiff fail to satisfactorily represent the interests of the corporation, the court may dismiss the suit.
This potential impact on corporate assets highlights the importance of understanding the legal process and requirements of a derivative action. Ensuring that the plaintiff acts in the best interests of the corporation and adequately represents its interests is crucial to protect the corporation’s assets and the interests of its shareholders.
Real-Life Examples of Derivative Actions
Derivative actions have been utilized in various real-life scenarios, including suits against companies such as Wynn Resorts, Wells Fargo, and Equifax. They have also been employed in monitoring temperature changes, calculating business profit and loss, and measuring speed and distance in vehicles.
In the following subsections, we will discuss some successful and unsuccessful derivative actions in more detail.
Successful Derivative Actions
Successful derivative actions involve legal actions initiated by shareholders that lead to positive outcomes for the corporation and its shareholders. These successful actions can include litigation related to inappropriate conduct towards employees or consumers, non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations, and data security infringements.
Examples of successful derivative actions may include lawsuits against directors or officers for mismanagement of funds, failure to divulge material information, or breach of fiduciary duty. These successful actions serve as a testament to the power and importance of derivative actions in holding corporate officers and directors accountable for their actions.
Unsuccessful Derivative Actions
Unsuccessful derivative actions are those that allege that boards have not fulfilled their fiduciary duties to a company and/or shareholders, but ultimately do not succeed in court. Instances of derivative actions that have not been successful include those against Wynn Resorts, Wells Fargo, and Equifax.
The reasons for the failure of these derivative actions varied, but often involved insufficient evidence or a lack of standing. These unsuccessful actions serve as a reminder of the importance of understanding and adhering to legal procedures and requirements in derivative actions to ensure the best possible outcome for the corporation and its shareholders.
Summary
In conclusion, derivative actions play a vital role in corporate law, allowing shareholders to hold officers and directors accountable for alleged misconduct or mismanagement. Understanding the legal process, requirements for adequate representation, and potential consequences of plaintiff’s failure is essential for navigating this complex area. By examining real-life examples of successful and unsuccessful derivative actions, we can appreciate the significance of these legal actions in protecting the interests of corporations and their shareholders. Armed with this knowledge, you are now better equipped to grasp the complexities of derivative actions and their implications in the world of corporate law.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is meant by derivative action?
Derivative action is a legal remedy used by shareholders when a company fails to act against officers or directors for their actions that have harmed the corporation. It allows shareholders to take action on behalf of the corporation, representing its interests in a lawsuit.
Who brings a derivative action?
Shareholders bring derivative actions, allowing them to sue on behalf of a corporation against its directors, officers, or other third parties who have breached their duties. Through this process, shareholders can seek to protect the interests of the company and ultimately benefit the corporation and all its stakeholders.
When can you bring a derivative action?
You can bring a derivative action when a demand has been made in writing requiring the corporation to take appropriate action and the corporation has either rejected the demand or will suffer irreparable harm if they wait.
Additionally, such action must be taken within 90 days of making the demand. Please note that this can vary from a jurisdiction to jurisdiction bases.
What is the difference between a direct lawsuit and a derivative lawsuit?
In short, the difference between a direct lawsuit and a derivative lawsuit is that a direct lawsuit seeks to protect an individual’s personal rights, whereas a derivative lawsuit aims to protect the collective rights of all owners of an entity.
What are some examples of behavior that could lead to a shareholder derivative action?
Shareholder derivative actions can be sparked by financial fraud, embezzlement, insider trading, or breach of fiduciary duty. Therefore, it is important for shareholders to be mindful of such activities when evaluating a company.
