Company: APM
Filing Date: 2025-12-05
Form Type: 424B5
Source: 0001213900-25-118752
Chunk: 378

Company: Aptorum Group Ltd
Filing Date: 2025-12-05
Form: 424B5
Chunk 378
---
 class acting in respect of his interest would reasonably approve; and                             |
| ● | the arrangement is not one that would more properly be sanctioned under some other provision of the Companies Law or that would amount to a “fraud on the minority.” |

When a take-over offer is
made and accepted by holders of not less than 90% of the shares within four months, the offer, or may, within a two-month period commencing
on the expiration of such four months period, require the holders of the remaining shares to transfer such shares on the terms of the
offer. An objection can be made to the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands but this is unlikely to succeed unless there is evidence of fraud,
bad faith or collusion.

If the arrangement and reconstruction
is thus approved, the dissenting shareholder would have no rights comparable to appraisal rights, which would otherwise ordinarily be
available to dissenting shareholders of United States corporations, providing rights to receive payment in cash for the judicially determined
value of the shares.

Shareholders’ Suits. In principle, we will normally be the proper plaintiff to sue for a wrong done to us as a company and as a general
rule a derivative action may not be brought by a minority shareholder. However, based on English authorities, which would in all likelihood
be of persuasive authority in the Cayman Islands, there are exceptions to the foregoing principle, including when:

| ● | a company acts or proposes to act illegally or ultra vires and is therefore incapable of ratification by the shareholders;                                     |
| ● | the act complained of, although not ultra vires, could only be duly effected if authorized by more than a simple majority vote that has not been obtained; and |
| ● | those who control the company are perpetrating a “fraud on the minority.”                                                                                      |

<div align='center'>218</div>

Indemnification of Directors and Executive Officers and Limitation of Liability. The Companies Law does not limit the extent to which a company’s
memorandum and articles of association may provide for indemnification of officers and directors, except to the extent any such provision
may be held by the Cayman Islands courts to be contrary to public policy, such as to provide indemnification against civil fraud or the
consequences of committing a crime. As stated above, our Memorandum and Articles permit indemnification of officers and directors for
actions, proceedings, claims, losses, damages, costs, liabilities and expenses (“Indemnified Losses”) incurred