Although a company is run on the will of majority shareholders, it does not mean that majority shareholders can pass resolutions at their own whims and fancies. The law will step in to protect minority shareholders where their rights and interests are affected. Nevertheless, the uppermost question is whether the current laws governing minority shareholder protection are adequate. Equally imperative is also whether minority shareholders play an active role in keeping a check on the way a company is being run i.e. shareholder activism.

Discuss and critically examine the above statement. Include in your discussion, the legal position in the United Kingdom, Australia, Singapore, Canada or New Zealand. The comparison should indicate that the country has adopted a more comprehensive approach in protecting minority shareholders