Minority Shareholder Oppression in Malaysia — Your Rights Under Section 346 Companies Act 2016
Shareholder disputes are among the most emotionally charged and legally complex areas of corporate law. While every company begins with a shared vision, disagreements can quickly escalate into power struggles — especially between majority and minority shareholders.
In Malaysia, minority shareholders are legally protected against unfair treatment through Section 346 of the Companies Act 2016. This provision allows the court to intervene when the majority abuses its power, acts oppressively, or prejudices the rights of the minority.
This article explains what constitutes shareholder oppression, your legal rights under Section 346, examples of oppressive conduct, and how we (JY Ko Advocates & Solicitors) can help you protect your interests.
✅ 1. Understanding the Balance of Power Between Majority and Minority Shareholders
Every company functions on majority rule — decisions are made based on the majority’s voting power. However, this principle can be abused when those in control use their power to:
- exclude minority shareholders from management,
- withhold information, or
- divert company profits for personal gain.
This is where minority protection laws come in. The Malaysian Companies Act 2016 balances corporate democracy (majority rule) with fairness (minority protection).
Under Section 346, the courts can step in when the company’s affairs are conducted in a manner oppressive, unfairly discriminatory, or prejudicial to the minority’s interests.
✅ 2. What Is Minority Shareholder Oppression?
Minority shareholder oppression occurs when majority shareholders abuse their control of the company to harm, sideline, or unfairly disadvantage minority shareholders.
It typically involves actions that, while technically lawful, are commercially or morally unfair.
Examples include:
- Issuing new shares to dilute the minority’s ownership.
- Refusing to declare dividends despite company profits.
- Removing minority shareholders from the board without reason.
- Withholding financial information or company records.
- Using company funds for personal benefit.
- Excluding minority shareholders from decision-making.
- Misusing company opportunities or assets.
- Favouring related companies or family members through contracts.
The essence of oppression is unfairness — not merely disagreement.
✅ 3. Legal Protection for Minority Shareholders: Section 346 Companies Act 2016
Section 346(1) of the Companies Act 2016 provides:
(1) Any member or debenture holder of a company may apply to the Court for an order under this section on the ground-
(a) that the affairs of the company are being conducted or the powers of the directors are being exercised in a manner oppressive to one or more of the members or debenture holders including himself or in disregard of his or their interests as members, shareholders or debenture holders of the company; or
(b) that some act of the company has been done or is threatened or that some resolution of the members, debenture holders or any class of them has been passed or is proposed which unfairly discriminates against or is otherwise prejudicial to one or more of the members or debenture holders, including himself.
This means that any shareholder, regardless of shareholding size, can apply to the court for relief if they can show:
- The company’s affairs are being conducted oppressively or unfairly, and
- The oppression affects their interests as a shareholder.
Section 346(2) empowers the court to “make such order as it thinks fit”, including:
- Regulating the future conduct of the company’s affairs;
- Ordering the majority to buy out the minority’s shares;
- Ordering the company to repurchase the minority’s shares;
- Appointing independent directors or auditors;
- Cancelling or varying company resolutions;
- Setting aside share allotments made to dilute minority interests.
This broad discretion gives the Malaysian courts wide powers to remedy unfairness.
✅ 4. What Constitutes “Oppressive” or “Unfairly Prejudicial” Conduct?
The Malaysian courts have consistently adopted a commercial fairness test — not every disagreement amounts to oppression.
Below are common examples as oppressive conduct:
4.1. Exclusion from Management
If you were promised a role in management and are suddenly removed without cause — especially in a quasi-partnership company — courts may view this as oppressive.
💡 Example:
Two founders start a company with equal input, but one uses his voting power to remove the other as director and locks him out of company decisions.
4.2. Diversion of Company Business
When majority shareholders divert company contracts or clients to another company they control, it constitutes breach of fiduciary duty and oppression.
4.3. Unjustified Share Dilution
Issuing new shares solely to reduce a minority’s voting power, without genuine business purpose, is a clear form of oppression.
4.4. Withholding Information
Refusing to show financial statements, bank records, or minutes of meetings may be deemed unfairly prejudicial, as it prevents the minority from protecting their interests.
4.5. Non-Declaration of Dividends
If a profitable company consistently refuses to declare dividends while paying large director allowances, it can amount to oppression.
4.6. Mismanagement or Misappropriation
Using company funds for personal expenses, family salaries, or unrelated business ventures is oppressive and possibly fraudulent.
✅ 5. The “Legitimate Expectation” Principle
A crucial doctrine under Section 346 cases is legitimate expectation.
Minority shareholders, particularly in small private or family companies, often enter with legitimate expectations — such as:
- participation in management;
- access to company information; or
- fair distribution of profits.
When majority shareholders act to defeat those expectations, the court may find unfair prejudice, even if the conduct is technically lawful.
This principle was affirmed in cases like Re Kong Thai Sawmill (Miri) Sdn Bhd [1978] and Re Kong Thai Sawmill (Miri) Sdn Bhd v Ling Beng Sung, where the court recognised the minority’s legitimate expectation to participate in management.
✅ 6. How to Prove Oppression Under Section 346
To succeed in a Section 346 petition for Oppression, you must show:
- Conduct of the company’s affairs:
The acts complained of must relate to how the company is being managed, not merely personal disputes. - Oppressive or unfairly prejudicial conduct:
The conduct must unfairly harm your interests as a shareholder — commercially or financially. - Continuous or ongoing conduct:
A single isolated act may not be enough unless it has lasting unfair effects. - Causation:
You must show the conduct caused harm or disadvantage to you or your shareholding value.
Evidence Commonly Used:
- Board meeting minutes and resolutions
- Financial statements
- Emails and WhatsApp communications
- Witness statements from staff or co-directors
- Proof of exclusion or share dilution
- Company filings with SSM
Your lawyer will help identify the strongest evidence to demonstrate oppression.
✅ 7. Remedies the Court Can Grant Under Section 346
The Malaysian courts have broad discretion to grant any order that remedies or prevents future oppression. Common orders include:
7.1. Share Buy-Out Order
The most common remedy: the majority is ordered to purchase the minority’s shares at a fair value.
Valuation is usually based on independent expert reports, ensuring fair compensation.
7.2. Company Buy-Back
Alternatively, the court may order the company itself to buy back the shares, if financially feasible.
7.3. Regulation of Company Affairs
The court may impose governance rules to prevent future abuse, such as requiring unanimous board consent for major decisions.
7.4. Appointment of Independent Directors
Where management misconduct is clear, the court can appoint neutral professionals to manage the company temporarily.
7.5. Rescission of Transactions
The court may cancel improper share allotments, transfers, or resolutions passed unfairly.
7.6. Winding-Up as a Last Resort
If oppression is so severe that no practical remedy exists, the court may order the company wound up on just and equitable grounds under Section 465.
However, this is usually a last resort — Section 346 aims to save the company, not destroy it.
✅ 8. Case Law Illustrations in Malaysia
A few notable cases illustrate how the courts interpret Section 346:
(a) Re Kong Thai Sawmill (Miri) Sdn Bhd [1978] 2 MLJ 227
The court recognised that a shareholder’s legitimate expectation to participate in management can form the basis of oppression if unfairly denied.
(b) Re Tham Chee Cheong & Anor v Seow Khee Leng [1996] 1 MLJ 480
The minority was unfairly excluded from management and dividends. The court ordered the majority to buy out the minority at fair value.
(c) Low Cheng Teik & Ors v. Low Ean Nee [2024] 9 CLJ 171
The Federal Court held that for a case of oppression to succeed, the minority shareholder has to show that
(i) what was the act or omission that one or more of the shareholders complained of – in short, identify the act, series of acts or omissions;
(ii) can the act(s) or omission(s) be characterised as being, (a) oppressive to; (b) in disregard of the interests of; (c) unfairly discriminatory against; or (d) otherwise prejudicial to, one or more of the shareholders;
(iii) does the cause of action vest in the shareholder or in the company;
(iv) who suffered loss or damage from the wrong done – the shareholder in his capacity as a shareholder or the company; and
(v) is the loss suffered by the shareholder, as the plaintiff, separate and distinct to the plaintiff in his capacity as a shareholder or is it a loss suffered by all the shareholders
These decisions show that the courts prioritise equitable treatment and commercial justice over mere legal technicalities.
✅ 9. What to Do If You Suspect Shareholder Oppression
If you feel sidelined or unfairly treated, take the following steps:
Step 1: Document Everything
Keep all correspondence, emails, resolutions, and meeting notes that indicate unfair conduct.
Step 2: Request Access to Records
Under the Companies Act, you have the right to inspect:
- company accounts,
- minutes of meetings, and
- member registers.
If access is denied, it strengthens your oppression claim.
Step 3: Engage a Corporate Litigation Lawyer
An experienced lawyer can:
- assess whether your situation meets the Section 346 test,
- issue formal legal notices,
- negotiate settlement or buy-out terms,
- and file a court petition when necessary.
Step 4: Seek Interim Relief
If urgent harm is occurring (e.g., share dilution, asset diversion), your lawyer can seek injunctions to freeze transactions pending trial.
✅ 10. Common Mistakes Minority Shareholders Make
- Waiting too long before taking action — delay may weaken your case.
- Failing to document evidence — courts rely on clear proof of oppression.
- Trying to negotiate informally with oppressive directors.
- Mixing personal grievances with genuine shareholder issues.
- Assuming the court will dissolve the company automatically.
Prompt legal advice ensures your rights are protected strategically.
✅ 11. Can You Recover Losses or Damages?
Yes.
In addition to structural remedies (buy-out, injunctions), the court may award:
- compensation for losses;
- restitution of misused funds;
- payment of withheld dividends;
- costs.
The goal of Section 346 is to put the minority back in a fair position, not to punish the majority.
✅ 12. Role of Lawyers in Section 346 Petitions
A corporate litigation lawyer plays a crucial role in:
- Evaluating the strength of your oppression claim.
- Gathering company documents and statutory records.
- Drafting affidavits, witness statements, and petitions.
- Negotiating buy-out valuations.
- Arguing for protective injunctions in court.
- Advising on tax and corporate implications of settlement.
At JY Ko Advocates & Solicitors, we understand both the legal and commercial dimensions of shareholder disputes. We provide tactical, solution-focused representation to help you achieve a fair outcome — efficiently and discreetly.
✅ 13. Preventing Shareholder Oppression Before It Happens
Many disputes arise because company structures were poorly drafted.
Prevention is always better than litigation.
Practical tips:
- Ensure clear shareholders’ agreements are in place.
- Specify decision-making thresholds (veto rights, reserved matters).
- Include buy-out and exit clauses.
- Require transparent financial reporting.
- Ensure board representation matches shareholding.
Having these safeguards can prevent future oppression and protect your investment.
✅ 14. Why Choose JY Ko Advocates & Solicitors
At JY Ko Advocates & Solicitors, we have handled complex shareholder disputes involving:
- breach of fiduciary duties,
- removal of directors,
- share dilution,
- business diversion,
- and minority oppression under Section 346.
Our firm is known for:
- Strategic legal solutions: balancing litigation and negotiation.
- Commercial insight: understanding business realities.
- Proven results: successfully obtaining injunctions, buy-out orders, and settlements.
- Personal attention: every case led by our partner and experienced litigation lawyers.
If you are a shareholder being sidelined, excluded, or unfairly treated — you have rights under Malaysian law.
Let us help you enforce them.
✅ 15. Conclusion
Minority shareholders are not powerless.
Under Section 346 of the Companies Act 2016, you can seek justice if majority shareholders abuse their power or act unfairly. The Malaysian courts have broad powers to ensure fairness — from ordering buy-outs to appointing independent directors.
If you believe your rights are being disregarded, seek legal advice immediately. Early action often leads to faster, better outcomes.
⚖️ Contact JY Ko Advocates & Solicitors Today
Our firm represents shareholders, directors, and partners in all types of corporate disputes, including:
- shareholder oppression under Section 346,
- breach of fiduciary duties,
- director / employee misconduct,
- corporate mismanagement,
- partnership dissolution, and
- injunction applications.
📞 Contact JY Ko Advocates & Solicitors for a confidential consultation.
We will assess your case and craft a strategy tailored to protect your interests and investment.
Contact JY Ko Advocates & Solicitors to make an appointment today!
🌐 Call us: +6017.6965.966 (Call / WhatsApp)
📩 Email Us: nick@jykolaw.com
Or fill in the contact form CLICK HERE
Disclaimer: The above proposition is subject to actual facts and circumstances and shall never be referred as the actual law without seeking legal advice. Consult us for more information!