When Business Partners Go to War: Navigating Shareholder Disputes

Starting a company with business partners is often built on a foundation of shared vision and trust. In the early days, everyone is pulling in the same direction. But as a business matures, priorities can diverge, personalities can clash, and what once seemed like a perfect partnership can start to feel like a battle for control.
Disputes between shareholders are one of the most common and damaging issues a private company can face. They can paralyse decision-making, destroy value, and turn trusted colleagues into bitter adversaries. Understanding the common battlegrounds and the legal pathways to resolution is essential for protecting your investment and your rights.
Common Battlegrounds: Where Disputes Ignite
Shareholder conflicts typically arise in a few key areas.
Disputes Over Control and Company Direction
This is the classic "vision" conflict. One shareholder might want to pursue aggressive, high-risk growth and expansion, while another prefers a conservative approach, focusing on steady profitability. This can lead to deadlock on major decisions, especially in a 50/50 ownership structure where neither party has a deciding vote.
The Dividend Dilemma: Reinvest vs. Distribute
Cash is the lifeblood of a business, and disagreements over what to do with profits are frequent. For example:
- An active shareholder working in the business may prefer to reinvest all profits back into the company to fuel growth.
- A passive shareholder (or one nearing retirement) may rely on that income and want the company to distribute profits as dividends.
This conflict places the financial goals of the shareholders in direct opposition.
Oppression of Minority Shareholders
This is one of the most serious and legally complex areas of conflict. It occurs when majority shareholders use their voting power to run the company in a way that is unfairly prejudicial to the minority shareholders.
Common examples of oppressive conduct include:
- Excluding minority shareholders from management roles they previously held.
- Paying excessive salaries and bonuses to themselves (the majority) to reduce the profits available for dividends for everyone.
- Diverting business opportunities or clients to other companies they control.
- Refusing to provide access to financial information.
- Blocking the minority shareholder from selling their shares at a fair market value.
Pathways to Resolution: From Negotiation to Court Action
If you find yourself in a shareholder dispute, a structured approach is critical.
Step 1: Check the Shareholders Agreement
A well-drafted Shareholders Agreement is your first and most important line of defence. This document is the "rulebook" for the company and its owners. It should contain clauses outlining:
- How key decisions are made.
- A process for valuing shares.
- A formal dispute resolution procedure (e.g., requiring mediation before litigation).
- How shares are to be sold / transferred.
Before you do anything else, review this agreement with a lawyer.
Step 2: Negotiation and Mediation
The most commercial and cost-effective solution is always a negotiated settlement. Formal or informal discussions, aimed at finding a business-like solution, should be your first step.
If direct negotiation fails, mediation is an excellent option. A neutral third-party mediator can help facilitate communication and guide the parties toward a mutually acceptable outcome, such as a structured buyout or a revised management plan.
Step 3: Your Legal Rights Under the Corporations Act 2001
When negotiation and mediation fail, the Corporations Act 2001 provides powerful remedies. The two most common actions are:
- The Oppression Remedy (Section 232): This is the primary tool for minority shareholders. If a court finds that the company's affairs are being conducted in a manner that is oppressive or unfairly prejudicial, it has broad powers to make orders. The most common order is for the majority to buy the minority shareholder's shares at a fair value, determined by an independent expert.
- Winding Up the Company (Section 461): This is the "nuclear option." A court can order the company to be wound up (liquidated) if it is "just and equitable" to do so. This is typically reserved for cases of complete deadlock or a total breakdown of mutual trust and confidence, where the company can no longer function as intended.
Protect Your Investment
A dispute with your business partners can feel personal and overwhelming. The key is to act strategically, not emotionally. By understanding your rights and the legal pathways available, you can move to protect your investment and fight for a fair outcome.
If you are involved in a shareholder dispute, don't wait for the situation to deteriorate. Contact us for expert legal advice on your rights and strategic options.

Senior Solicitor
Email: kristen@hntlegal.com.au
Author
List of Services
-
Matthew HammondMatthew Hammond Matthew Hammond
-
Vivian NguyenVivian Nguyen Vivian Nguyen
-
Maria ValenzuelaMaria Valenzuela Maria Valenzuela
-
David CleverleyDavid Cleverley David Cleverley
-
Peter MorrisPeter Morris Peter Morris
-
Andrew PaciniAndrew Pacini Andrew Pacini
-
Marie-Cecilia FerreiraMarie-Cecilia Ferreira Marie-Cecilia Ferreira
-
Jabour HaddadJabour Haddad Jabour Haddad
-
Razeeha ReillyRazeeha Reilly Razeeha Reilly
-
Jack DunnJack Dunn Jack Dunn
-
Melanie KorialMelanie Korial Melanie Korial
-
Albert ThaiAlbert Thai Albert Thai
-
Martin AbdelsayedMartin Abdelsayed Martin Abdelsayed
-
Jamie-Lee MerhiJamie-Lee Merhi Jamie-Lee Merhi
-
Rachel SiewRachel Siew Rachel Siew
-
Dajana PopovicDajana Popovic Dajana Popovic
-
Sarah FoddaSarah Fodda Sarah Fodda
-
Lina VoLina Vo Lina Vo
-
Andre BarkhoAndre Barkho Andre Barkho
-
Alessia GiglioAlessia Giglio Alessia Giglio
-
Alexander BatshonAlexander Batshon Alexander Batshon
-
Gauri KoteraGauri Kotera Gauri Kotera
-
Michelle GalaritaMichelle Galarita Michelle Galarita
-
Bea OctavaBea Octava Bea Octava
-
Georgia MoaitGeorgia Moait Georgia Moait
-
Trisha NguyenTrisha Nguyen Trisha Nguyen
Share to








