RE:RE:RE:Not a Win for Edward, it's a Win for Shareholders!!!!You need to go back to Google law school and learn how a corporation works, then maybe you could advise the Judge next time or maybe the Rogers family should have hired you ???....Lol
shareholders1 wrote: RD78 - Using truisms is not analysis and it doesn't demonstrate understanding. Neither does your "Lol".
If it is correct that Edward has control of the Trust and thus the voting shares and ultimately, at the next shareholders' meeting, could vote in his own board, the more immediate issue was could Edward replace the board without a shareholders' meeting.
In other words, is a resolution, without a shareholders meeting, sufficient? The BCCA, Articles of Incorporation and the By-laws would need to be all read together in order to conclude. Not to mention case law. You had not done that.