Abstract
Being a shareholder in a company may sound gratifying, but it is not without its challenges. Shareholders in companies – especially minority shareholders - often face many challenges, such as unfairly prejudicial treatment. This treatment arises particularly from directors and majority shareholders. In some cases, it leads to biased decision-making and outcomes that disregard minority shareholders' interests. The oppression remedy is available to minority shareholders facing such challenges. The potential inadequacies of the oppression remedy as regulated in South Africa under section 163 of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 undermine the efficacy of the relief sought. Inevitably, this makes seeking relief an additional challenge. This study critically analyses the strengths and weaknesses of the regulation of the oppression remedy in South Africa and the United Kingdom. By leveraging case law and analysing the similarities and differences between the two jurisdictions, this study offers potential lessons for South Africa.